Full text of "Heroism, Heritage And Nationhood"

See other formats

(ESSAYS AND FEATURES FROM THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE)

Heroism, Heritage, and Nationhood

(Essays and Features from the Official Gazette)

Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office
www.gov.ph

ISBN 978-971-95551-8-6

The content of this publication may be copied, adapted, and redistributed provided that the
material is not used for commercial purposes and that proper attribution be made.

Published by

The Presidential Communications Development
and Strategic Planning Office
Office of the President of the Philippines
3/F New Executive Building,

Malacahan Palace, San Miguel, Manila
Tel.: 736-0719, 736-0718
Fax no.: 736-6167
Website: www.pcdspo.gov.ph

Book design by the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office
Published in the Philippines.

The National Library of the Philippines CIP Data

Recommended entry:

Heroism, heritage, and nationhood : (essays and
features from the official gazette) / Manuel L.

Quezon, editor in chief. - Manila : The Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic
Planning Office, [2016].
pages ; cm

ISBN 978-971-95551-8-6

1. Philippines- History - Sources. 2. Flags - Philippines.

3. Manila (Philippines) - History. 4. Aquino, Benigno Simeon
C., Ill, I960-. I. Quezon, Manuel L., III.

959.9 DS667.2

2016 P620160122

The Republic of the Philippines

BENIGNO S. AQUINO III

President of the Philippines

PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS DEVELOPMENT
AND STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE

MANUEL L. QUEZON III

Undersecretary of Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning
Officer-in-Charge

JAN MIKAEL dL. CO

Assistant Executive Secretary

Senior Presidential Speechwriter and Head of Correspondence Office

POCHOLO GOITIA

Assistant Secretary
Managing Editor, Official Gazette

GINO ALPHONSUS A. BAYOT

Director V

Head, Research Division

JONATHAN F. CUEVAS

Director IV
Technical Director

MA. ROMMIN M. DIAZ

Director III

Head Executive Assistant

YOLANDO B. JAMENDANG JR.

Director II

Head, Message Crafting Division

TERESITA L. MENDIOLA

Chief Administrative Officer

KATHERINE AIRA M. ESPINO

Institutional Memory
Official Gazette

MARK PHILIPPE LEGASPI

Heritage

KRISTINA D. JAVIER

Media Monitoring

SASHA MARTINEZ

Social Media

ATTY. SARAH Q. SISON

Legal Concerns

CHRISTIAN F. SOQUENO

Citizen Engagement
Official Gazette

HEROISM, HERITAGE, AND NATIONHOOD

(Essays and Features from the Official Gazette)

PUBLICATIONS DIVISION

Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office

MANUEL L. QUEZON III

Editor in Chief

POCHOLO GOITIA

Managing Editor

JONATHAN F. CUEVAS

Technical Director

MARK PHILIPPE LEGASPI

Project Manager

CAMILLE ROSE DUFOURT

Project Coordinator

JEAN ARBOLEDA
JOSELITO ARCINAS
ADRIAN BACCAY
MARK BLANCO
COLINE ESTHER CARDENO
JUSTIN SILOS GATUSLAO
GRACE GUIANG
SASHA MARTINEZ
FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION
RONALDO RECTO
NASTASIA TYSMANS
SARAH JESSICA WONG
Writers and Researchers

CHEREY ANN MAE BIGAY
ROBERTO DANIEL DEVELA

Photo Researchers

JOI MARIE ANGELICA INDIAS

Book Design & Art Direction

DERRICK MACUTAY

Artist

BIANCA STELLA BUENO
CAMILLE DEL ROSARIO
CHERIE LYNN TAN
ALEXIS TORIO

Graphic Designers

MA. ROMMIN M. DIAZ
MITZI ONG
SANDI SUPLIDO

Support Staff

CONTENTS

Introduction

vii

PRE-COLONIAL PERIOD

Pre-colonial Manila

The Evolution of Manila

PHILIPPINE REVOLUTION

June 12 and the Commemoration of
Philippine Independence

Origin of the Symbols of our
National Flag

History of the Philippine Flag

Tejeros Convention

The Founding of the Katipunan

ANDRES BONIFACIO

Imprinting Andres Bonifacio: The
Iconization from Portrait to Peso

Bonifacio Sesquicentennial

JOSE REAL

The Centenary of the Rizal
Monument

APOLINARIO MABINI

Mabini’s Revolt

The Mabini Republic

100

Mabini Shrine and Bridge

104

FIRST REPUBLIC

Araw ng Republikang Filipino

109

Visayas and the Fight for Philippine
Independence

113

COMMONWEALTH OF THE
PHILIPPINES

Inauguration of the Commonwealth
of the Philippines

129

WORLD WAR II IN THE
PHILIPPINES

Massacres in the Battle of Manila

134

Timeline: Battle of Manila

146

Araw ng Kagitingan Legislation

150

The Fall of Bataan

153

Japanese Invasion of the Philippines

158

SECOND REPUBLIC

Second Republic

160

THIRD REPUBLIC

Third Republic

162

Evolution of the Quirino Grandstand

174

Republic Day

183

May 28 and July 4: Mystery Solved

188

MARTIAL LAW

Declaration of Martial Law

193

The Fall of the Dictatorship

202

EDS A PEOPLE POWER REVOLUTION

A History of the Philippine Political
Protest

226

EDSA, Elsewhere: The 1986 People
Power Revolution

242

Dancing to the Tune of the
Revolution: 5 Songs of EDSA

245

PROTOCOL

Benigno S. Aquino III and the
Presidency

248

Constitution Day

253

The 1987 Constitution: A
Chronological Narrative

259

MALACANAN PALACE AND THE
MANSION HOUSE

History of the Malacanan Palace

264

Historic Rooms inside Malacanan
Palace

269

State Rooms inside Malacanan
Palace

271

Kalayaan Hall

275

Mabini Hall

279

Malacanan Park and Bahay Pangarap

280

New Executive Building

282

Mansion House

283

PRESIDENTIAL TRANSPORTS

Presidential Yachts

291

Presidential Planes

296

HONORS CODE

Quezon Service Cross

301

Order of Lakandula

306

Order of Sikatuna

308

Philippine Legion of Honor

311

Order of National Artists

314

Order of National Scientists

322

Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan

327

Gawad Mabini

333

Order of the Golden Heart

339

The Presentation of Credentials to
the President by the Ambassadors
to the Philippines

341

State of the Nation Address:
Traditions and History

348

The Possession of
Malacanan Palace

360

The Protocol, Ceremony, History,
and Symbolism of the Presidential
Inauguration

363

Vin D’ Honneur

374

OFFICIAL CALENDAR OF THE
REPUBLIC

National Heroes Day

379

Malacanan Palace Prowlers:
Ghosts, Elementals, and Other
Phantasmagoric Tales

383

Our Heritage and the Departed:
A Cemeteries Tour

392

National Day of Mourning

410

MILITARY

History of the Department of
National Defense

416

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

The Philippines as a Haven for
Refugees

432

The Difference Between a State
Visit, Official Visit, and Working Visit

439

Acknowledgments

442

INTRODUCTION

The Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO) was
established with the task of preserving and curating the institutional memory of the Office of
the President by virtue of Executive Order No. 4, which was signed by President Benigno S.
Aquino III on July 30, 2010. Since then, the PCDSPO has stood at the forefront of keeping
the public informed and promoting interest in the story of the Filipino people. The PCDSPO
has achieved this by combining the traditional long-form essay with new technologies and
archived resources: historical papers, photo collections, audio and video, monographs, articles,
and textbooks.

Several milestones have been observed over the course of President Aquino’s six-year
administration, such as the sesquicentennial of Andres Bonifacio’s birth in 2013 and Pope
Francis’ first visit to the Philippines in 2015. These milestones were commemorated with special
pages on the Official Gazette’s (www.gov.ph) and the Presidential Museum and Fibrary’s (www.
malacanang.gov.ph) websites, which are managed by the PCDSPO. These special pages consist
of long-form essays or briefers, photo collections, audio and video recordings, interactive
timelines, infographics, maps, and digitized copies of historical documents.

In addition to these commemorative pages, the PCDSPO has also written long-form essays
on the presidency, heritage, protocol, heraldry, and culture. These include briefers on the
origin of the symbols of the national flag, the presidential inauguration ceremony, and alleged
supernatural occurrences in the Malacanan Palace.

The essays written by the PCDSPO over the years cover such a wide scope of topics as to
constitute an authoritative book on Philippine history. Heroism, Heritage, and Nationhood:
Essays and Features from the Official Gazette is a compendium of these essays.

This project has been made possible by the invaluable assistance of experts in their field, by a
team of talented young people, and the lively interest of the public, which has seen many of
these essays in their initial versions in the Official Gazette’s and the Presidential Museum and
Fibrary’s websites.

VII

Pre-colonial Manila

COLINE ESTHER CARDENO AND JOSELITO ARCINAS

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 444th foundation day of
the City of Manila, June 24, 2015]

elite and influential commoners. Third,
chiefs sponsored feasts attended by allies
and subordinates to negotiate social status
relations within their network. 141

INTRODUCTION

Prior to the time of European contact, most
of the major islands in what is now known as
the Philippines had a rich political landscape
consisting of polities 111 known as chiefdoms
of different economic scale and hierarchical
complexity. These societies are said to be
integrated into a regional network through
local-based trading and raiding activities.
The chief, who plays a central role in the
political and economic well-being of the
polity, controlled and mobilized the goods to
create alliance among and between polities. 121

Early polities in the Philippines put primacy
on alliance networking rather than territorial
conquest in expanding their political power.
These networks derived their legitimacy in
three ways: circulation of prestige goods (such
as porcelain, celadon, jewelry), marriage,
and ritual feasting. First, distribution of
prestige goods were used to unify rulers
to elite members of the society. [3] Second,
chiefs strategically contracted marriage
with daughters and sisters of the political

Scholars agree that there existed a settlement
called Manila dated prior to the arrival of
the Spaniards in f570. The place-name
of Manila is explained by two contesting
theories. First, it comes from may nilad,
which means a place with mangrove shrubs /
trees bearing white flowers 151 ( Ixora manila).
From this, we can infer that the general
geographic condition of Manila was swampy
and coastal. 161 Second, it comes from may
nila which referred to the dye extracted from
the same plant. 171

This appreciation of the origin of the
place name Manila is only one of the
many significant accounts, historical and
archaeological, that can shape our collective
memory and understanding of the heritage of
the Manila we know today. The succeeding
sections will chronicle the story of Manila
from being one of the earliest recorded
settlement in the Philippines during the 11th
century to the Spanish conquest of the Raja
Sulayman-ruled Manila in 1570.

PRE-COLONIAL POLITIES AND
SETTLEMENT IN MANILA

mind. But in 1000 A.D., or 500 years prior
to the arrival of Spaniards in Manila, 181 a
settlement (along the banks of the present day
Pasig River) termed Sapa l9] already existed
in the present day Santa Ana, Manila. Its
archaeology is considered one of the earliest
evidence of a continuous occupation in the
area of Manila for at least a thousand years
prior to the Spanish settlement. 1101 In the
Santa Ana Church, archaeologists found a
midden deposit (garbage mound) of Chinese
ceramics, shells, and bones of pig, deer, and
water buffalo alongside human burials. 1111

These human burials numbered at least
Today, when we think of historic Manila, the 300 graves from different locations in the
Spanish fortified city of Intramuros comes to Santa Ana aread 13] The earliest finds were

MANILA

SOS CONTORNOS

fQ) Manilaflocated in present day Fort
Santiago), ruled by Rajah Sulayman

Sapa (located in present day Sta. Ana),
settlement dated to the 11th century

Tondo, ruled by Rajah Lakandula

Disclaimer: These are approximate locations of the pre-colonial polities in Manila according to historical and
archeological data.

PHOTO: Map of the pre-colonial polities and settlements in Manila rendered by the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office. Base map courtesy of Juan Noguera.

recorded by Otley H. Beyer and Sofronic G.
Calderon’s collaborative excavation in 1926.
The site yielded graves that are dated prior to
1570. They were described to be “in the old
native pagan style in which glazed porcelain,
jewelry, and other objects are buried with
the dead.” There were also pieces of bones
identified to be those of deer and interpreted
as sacrifices for the graves. Huge bones that
may be those of rhinoceroses and elephants
were also found. The glazed celadons found
in site are dated to be Ming ceramics, circa
1368-1644. 1141

Specifically, in the churchyard, 202 of the
burials were accompanied by tradeware
ceramics from the Sung, Yuan, and early
Ming dynasties (late 11th to 14th centuries).
These prestige goods were understood to be
an indicator of status of the deceased. Other
grave goods discovered were decorated pots,
glass and stone beads, metal, iron, bronze
implements, and 11th-century Chinese coins.
In addition, a large amount of metal slugs
were uncovered which indicated that the
settlement was possibly engaged in metal
crafting. 1151

While there may have evidence of early
settlement, metal crafting and early Chinese
trade in Santa Ana as early as the Tlth
century, Victor J. Paz, an archaeologist from
the UP- Archaeological Studies Program,
contends that Santa Ana might not have
been a politically major settlement during
that time. The reason being that it was not
mentioned in the polities enumerated in the
Laguna Copperplate Inscription (LCI) dated
to 922 CE (10th century). 1171 The copper
plate is considered the oldest document
found in the Philippines 1181 that can shed light

PHOTO: Mrs. Lady Bird Johnson and Dr. Robert B.
Fox in the excavation at the Santa Ana churchyard
for the Pre-Spanish Manila Through Archaeology
project of the National Museum of the Philippines
Photo courtesy of Philamagazine [16]

v-‘ PI.

' \ \ C7-
v\^

PHOTO: Artifacts found in the excavation at the
Santa Ana churchyard for the Pre-Spanish Manila
Through Archaeology project of the National
Museum of the Philippines. Photo courtesy of
Philamagazine [12]

on Philippine political structure in terms of
political hierarchy and networks, and debt
and slavery, 1191 which are impossible to infer
from the Santa Ana site.

What the discovery of the LCI informed us is
that in the 10th century, Tondo was already
an established polity. 1201 Spanish accounts
mentioned that it was a thriving settlement

Laguna

ANTOON POSTM A [26][27]

Hail! In the Saka-year 822; the month of
March-April; according to the astronomer:
the 4th day of the dark half of the moon;
on Monday. At that time, Lady Angkatan
together with her relative, Bukah by name,
the child of His Honor Namwran, was
given, as a special favor, a document of full
acquittal, by the Chief and Commander
of Tundun.the former Leader of Pailah,
Jayadewah. To the effect that His Honor
Namwran, through the Honorable Scribe
was totally cleared of a debt to the amount
of 1 kati and 8 suwarna (weight of gold), in
the presence of His Honor the Leader of
Puliran, Kasumuran; His Honor the Leader
of Pailah, namely: Ganasakti; (and) His
Honor the Leader of Binwangan, namely:
Bisruta. And (His Honor Namwran) with
his whole family, on orders by the Chief of
Dewata, representing the Chief of Mdang,
because of his loyalty as a subject (slave?)
of the Chief, therefore all the descendants
of His Honor Namwran have been cleared
of the whole debt that His Honor owed
the Chief of Dewata. This (document)
is (issued) in case there is someone,
whosoever, some time in the future, who
will state that the debt is not yet acquitted
of His Honor...

located upstream at the northern bank of the Pasig
River ruled by Raja Lakandula (Lakan Dula), with
complex political hierarchy and established alliances,
pi] [ 22 ] [23] i t was even an entrepot of goods from China,
Japan, Borneo, Siam, and the Malay peninsula before
the Spanish move their trade center in Manila. The
Raja, according to Spanish accounts, was a Bruneian
noble who was sent to be a port supervisor in Tondo
to oversee the flow of trade into and out of Pasig. [24]
He was also related by blood to the rulers of Manila,
Raja Ladyang Matanda or Ache and his nephew and
heir, Raja Sulayman (alternately spelled: Suleyman
or Solimanjd 251

The LCI was the first document that can shed light
on the nature of the political hierarchy by portraying
slavery in early Philippine society. The copperplate
was a certificate acquitting the debt incurred by a
person named Namwran, together with his family,
relatives, and descendants to the chief of Dewata (in
present day Mt. Diwata, near Butuan). [281 Namwran
was understood to be a man of status but due to
his debt, he became a “debt slave or servant”. His
relatives were seeking release from the obligation
through the chief of Tondo, Jayadewa. Jayadewa,
the chief and commander of Tundun (the present
day Tondo, Manila) in return commanded the chiefs
of Puliran, Pailah, and Binwangan to witness the
acquittal of Namwran of his debt amounting to 865
grams of gold. 1291

Furthermore, the document also illustrated network
and political link between the 10th century polities.
Pailah, Puliran, and Binwangan were theorized by
Postma to be in the present day Bulacan: Paila in
Norzagaray, the Pulilan municipality, and Binuangan
in Obandod 301 Other source contests Pailah to be the
town of Pila while Puliran is understood to be a place
located somewhere in present-day Laguna. 1311 Other
place names such as Mdang referred to a temple
complex in Java, whose chief is called Mataramd 321

. H5

: v~.

" y+-.tgta

£($ar* * '-•

..^• ' 'JU'ifolL cc
~ .f" f

f^V

spL-a

- «r ~ > g§|

V •. - ;' ?“

* *“ V? '-' d(\ (x *J s3<v

' - . rtz-'i'C C-^ w t: ,’ f> fr

PHOTO: The Laguna Copperplate. Photo courtesy of the National Museum of the Philippines.

Despite the lack of archaeological records
similar to Santa Ana, it can be inferred
that Tondo of the 10th century has a well-
organized government based on customary
law, ruled by the chief, Jayadewa, who
exercised legal powers, as in the case of
acquitting a debt from a slave. It can also be
deduced that Tondo already had connections
to the chiefs in Puliran, Pailah, and Binuangan
and farther polities like Butuan. 1331

Another complex polity parallel to the earlier
maritime states in Island Southeast Asia is
Manila. [34] Situated on the bank of the present
day Pasig River, 1 1351 Manila was ruled by
blood-related chiefs namely: Raja Ladyang
Matanda or Ache, cousin of Raja Lakandula,
and his nephew and heir Raja Sulayman.
1361 Like Raja Lakandula of Tondo, Raja
Matanda was also of Bruneian descent having
his maternal grandfather, Sultan Bulkeiah of
Brunei the conqueror of Manila in the early
sixteenth century. 13711381 This suggests that Raja
Sulayman was a third generation ruler of
Bruneian descent in Manila. *

Spanish accounts described Raja Sulayman’s
residence within a fortified settlement (the

present-day Fort Santiago) 1391 as very large
with valuables such as money, porcelain,
copper, iron, wax, and other local and
imported goods used for traded 401 It was used
as a location for meetings and ceremonies 1411 .
There was a reported structure just next
to his house with stored iron, copper, and
cannons which suggest that production is
directly controlled by him. 1421 The settlements
were situated in the coasts or banks of the
rivers and the houses were built on stilts. [43]

The topography of Manila 1441 , according to
the Relacion de las Islas Filipmas of 1570,
was described as having land around the bay
that is “tilled and cultivated; having smooth
slopes and of little herbage.” Manila was said
to have a palisade made of coconut trunks
defending the town along its front. Many
warriors were guarding the palisade and the
shore was mentioned to be crowded with
people. Four Chinese ships were mentioned
to be sighted close to the houses of the locals
indicating trade and exchange. 1451

In a letter of Miguel Lopez de Legazpi to the
viceroy of Mexico, Manila was described
to have direct access to the China trade. 1461

The Chinese brought silk, cotton robes,
earthenware jars, gilded porcelain, gold
thread, benzoin, and mask twice a year to
Manila. In exchange, they would procure
cinnamon, pepper, wax, iron, copper, bronze,
steel, gold, and pearls locally. 1471 Manila was
considered to be one of the most important
international trade port during that time. 1481
Traders of Manila was said to conduct regular
trips to Borneo to trade cinnamon, wax, and
brass. 1491 Locally, Manila has control over a
large parts of southeastern Luzon and most
of the coastal villages within the Calatagan
Peninsula. 1501

the chiefs wore more elegant clothing and
wore anklets of gold around their arms.
The wealthiest owned slaves that were both
Muslims and non-Muslims. They also wore
colorful head dresses with golden trinkets
and other body ornaments. 1511 Carmencita
Aguilar, a professor of Social Sciences in the
University of the Philippines, refers to the
people as Muslim however Linda A. Newson
in the book Conquest and Pestilence in Early
Spanish Philippines, posits that:

There is no evidence that Islam had become a
major religious and political force in the region.
Indeed, in 1570 Father Herrera observed that
Moros were found only in certain villages near
the coast and were Muslim only in name and in
their abstinence from eating pork; they did not
possess mosques or religious leaders. [52]

In Tagalog societies, there was a three-class
social structure composed of Maginoo
(Ruling Class), Timawa and Maharlika (The
Freemen), and Alipin (Slaves) as shown in
the table on the next page.

The population at that time was estimated
to be composed of at least 2,000 people.
The inhabitants were well-attired and that

TAGALOG SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

CLASS

DESCRIPTION

Maginoo (Ruling class)

Lakan, Rajah

The Lakan or Rajah was the paramount
Datu of a large town.

Datu

The Datu were magino with personal
followings (dulohan or barangay). His
responsibilities included governing his
people, leading them in war, protecting
them from enemies, and settling disputes.

Usually, four to ten datu lived with their
dulohan in a town.

Maginoo

The Maginoo comprised the ruling class
of the Tagalogs. Ginoo was an honorific
for both men and women.

Panginoon (sometimes shorted to poon
when addressing them directly) were
maginoo who had many slaves and other
valuable property like houses and boats.

Timawa and maharlika
(Freemen)

Timawa

The Timawa were non-slaves who could
attach themselves to the datu of their
choice. They could use and bequeath a
portion of barangay land, and rendered
services and agricultural labor to the
datu.

Members included: illegitimate children
of Maginoo and slaves, and former alipin
who paid off their debts.

Maharlika

The Maharlika were similar to the
Timawa, except they also rendered
military services to the datu.

Alipin (Slaves)

Alipin

Aliping namamahay lived in their own

namamahay

houses apart from their debtor. They were
allowed to farm a portion of barangay
land, but they were expected to turn over
a portion of their harvest to their master.
Members included: those who inherited
debts from namamahay parents, timawa
who went into debt, and former male
Alipin sa gigilid who married.

Alipin sa gigilid

Alipin sa gigilid lived in their debtor’s
house and were entirely dependent on
him for food and shelter.

Members included: children born in the
debtor’s house (e.g. children of other
alipin, or gintubo), and children of
parents who were too poor to raise them.

Recent archaeology in Fort Santiago do not
show pre-colonial artifacts. As Beyer wrote in
his summary of the archaeology of Manila 1531 :

Results of exploration indicate downtown
Manila was inhabited only from about 1480 or
1500 onwards. The really old part of the area
lies up the river, and has been explored by our
Santa Ana site.

However, in 2008, the National Museum
uncovered an earthenware sherd with ancient
inscription at the ruins of the San Ignacio
Church which was inferred as evidence of
an ancient writing. 1541 This was “associated
with trade ware ceramics attributed to the
Ming Dynasty, the ancient inscription was
compared with Tagalog and Kapampangan
scripts. It can be read tentatively as ‘Palaki’
and interpreted as A la ke (Alay Kay).” [5S1

PHOTO: Inscribed pot shard uncovered at the
ruins of San Ignacio Church. Photo courtesy of the
National Museum of the Philippines.

EPILOGUE

In 1570, upon the arrival of the Spaniards
in Manila, Spanish accounts narrated the
compact of friendship made between Martin
de Goiti, master-of-camp of the Spanish fleet,

and the Raja Sulayman, the ruler of Manila.
In this custom, de Goiti drew his blood along
with Raja Sulayman; the chief drank the
blood of de Goiti mixed with wine and the
master-of-camp drank the blood of the chief
in the same manner. 1561

This compact of friendship and peace broke
down due to misunderstandings. Martin de
Goiti, aboard his ship, misinterpreted the
tapaques (merchant vessel) bearing traders
as a hostile force being sent to attack the
Spaniards. He sent a few of his ships to
survey the situation and, understanding that
this might be interpreted by the inhabitants
as sign of aggression, called them back by
firing a cannon towards the sea. This shot was
interpreted by Sulayman and his men as an
attack from the Spaniards, thus leading to the
outbreak of conflict on May 24, 1570, known
as the first Battle of Manila. 1571 The Spanish
forces, having superior artillery, defeated Raja
Sulayman, leaving the town of Manila in
ashes. On June 6, 1570, upon the conquest of
the Sulayman-ruled Manila, Martin de Goiti,
with the presence of the chief notary of the
Spanish government Hernando Riquel issued
in Manila, the Act of Taking Possession of
LuzonS 5S]

Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, having known
that Manila was conquered, travelled to
Luzon reaching Manila in the middle of May
1571. 1591 The Spanish captain-general made
peace with the rulers of the pre-colonial
Manila; Raja Sulayman, Raja Matanda and
Lakandula, forgiving their act of hostility
towards the Spanish troops. On the third of
June, 1571, Legazpi conferred the title of city
on the colony of Manila and on the 24th of
the same month, the day of Saint John, he

appointed two alcaldes in ordinary (translated
in The Philippine Islands: Volume III by Blair
and Robertson as “judges”); one alguacil-
mayor (sheriff or chief constable) and twelve
regidores (councilors) establishing the cabildo
or the city council that laid the administrative
foundation of the Spanish city of Manila. 1601

Conferring the title of city on the colony of
Manila, involved a ritual of city foundation
that was elaborate, as scholar and writer
Jose Victor Torres recently mentioned in the
online forum Manila Nostalgia:

Unknown to many present-day historians, the
establishment of a city according to colonial
customs involved an elaborate ceremony that
was followed by the conquistadors during the
Age of Conquest in the 16th century.

"Witnessed by a group composed of
Spaniards and natives, the commander of the
colonizers selected a spot and had a hole dug
deep enough for a tree trunk to be buried in
and leave a protruding section around 1.4 to
1.8 meters high. The trunk was then lowered
into the hole with the help of the natives.
Then the commander will drive a knife into the
trunk, turn to his audience and announce in a
loud voice:

“Gentlemen, soldiers and comrades and all
others who witness this: Here I set gallows
and sword, and found and place the city of

, which may God keep long years:

reserving the right to move it to any another
site that might prove more convenient. And
this city I cause to be in the name of the
King, and in his name I will defend it and
will maintain peace and justice with all the
Spaniards, conquistadores, citizens, residents

and strangers, with all the natives meting
justice alike to the rich and to the poor, to
the lowly and to the high, and protecting the
widows and orphans.”

The commander then draws his sword and
made a wide clearing of the people around
him as he shouted a challenge: “If there be any
here who would challenge this, let him come
forward and out with me to the open field
where I will measure my sword with his. And
this I swear, for I am intent to die defending
this city, now or whenever, keeping it for the
King my Lord and his Captain, servant and
subject, and as a gentleman born...”

This challenge is recited thrice and three times
the Spaniards will respond: "The city is well
founded. Long Live the King and Our Lord."

A translator was present so that the natives
understood. After reciting the ritual, the
commander then slashed at the surrounding
plants saying that he is placing the city under
the authority of the Audiencia or Governor
and that he is making it the capital. A cross is
then planted on the site of the planned church
for the city and a Mass is said by a priest. The
ceremony is then ended with a salvo from
cannons and a celebration.

And, thus, a City is made.

Miguel Lopez de Legazpi treated the Rajas
and their relatives with deference and
promised them privileges such as exemption
to the tribute. However upon the death of
Captain General Legazpi on August 20,
1572, Captain General Guido de Lavezaris
(Captain General from 1572-1575) did not
recognize the assurances of Legazpi, causing

conflict with the former rulers of Manila.
In 1574, Lakandula and Raja Sulayman
launched an attack against the Spanish
citadel in Manila. The conflict ended after
Juan de Salcedo, grandson of Miguel Lopez
de Legazpi, gave another assurance that
Spanish promises would be kept. Still in
1587, Martin Panga and Agustin de Legazpi,
descendants of Lakandula, planned a revolt
against the Spanish rule in the Philippines.
They were discovered by the Spanish
government eventually leading to the capture
and execution of the leaders.

Despite the execution the blood compact as
an agreement binding both Spaniards and
Filipinos in mutual obligation persisted as an
important theme.

This assurance of friendship was considered
by the Filipino revolutionists of the late 19th
century as an agreement violated by Spain
through excessive abuse of power and unfair
treatment of Filipinos. As Andres Bonifacio,
President of the Katipunan, wrote in an
essay, “Ang dapat mabatid ng mga tagalog,”
(c. March 1896):

Ngayon sa lahat ng ito’y ano ang sa mga
guinawa nating paggugugol nakikitang
kaguinhawahang ibinigay sa ating Bayan?
Ano ang nakikita nating pagtupad sa kanilang
kapangakuan na siang naging dahil ng ating
pag gugugol! Wala kung di pawang kataksilan
ang ganti sa ating mga pagpapala at mga
pagtupad sa kanilang ipinangakung tayo'y
lalung guiguisingin sa kagalingan ay bagkus
tayong binulag, inihawa tayo sa kanilang
hamak na asal, pinilit na sinira ang mahal at
magandang ugali ng ating Bayan; Yminulat
tayo sa isang maling pagsampalataya at

isinadlak sa lubak ng kasamaan ang kapurihan
ng ating Bayan; at kung tayo'y mangahas
humingi ng kahit gabahid na lingap, ang
naguiguing kasagutan ay ang tayo’y itapon
at ilayo sa piling ng ating minamahal na anak,
asawa at matandang magulang. Ang bawat
isang himutok na pumulas sa ating dibdib ay
itinuturing na isang malaking pagkakasala
at karakarakang nilalapatan ng sa hayop na
kabangisa.

This historical precedent became the clause
that legitimized the Philippine Revolution
against Spain-enshrined in the words of
June 12, 1898 Proclamation of Philippine
Independence:

... he [Legazpi] went to Manila, the capital,
winning likewise the friendship of its Chiefs
Solimanand Lakandula, latertaking possession
of the city and the whole Archipelago in the
name of Spain by virtue of an order of King
Philip II, and with these historical precedents
and because in international law the
prescription established by law to legalize the
vicious acquisition of private property is not
recognized, the legitimacy of such revolution
can not be put in doubt ...

The final postscript, in a sense, to the
conquest of Manila, would come from an
American. Writing in Philippine Magazine
on 1931, Luther Parker, recounted that:

I found Don Lucino Gatdula, one of the last of
the Lakandola family which had been a Tondo
family before the time of the conquest, living
at No. 427 Calle Sande in a small nipa house,
in uninviting surroundings, with tide water
standing in pools to the west of the house,

while on the east an unsavory Chinese garden
polluted the atmosphere.

Although only 56 years old at that time Don
Lucino looked much older, but his faculties
seemed unimpaired. He gave his father’s name
as Santiago Gatdula who died July 24, 1873,
at the age of 73 years. Although Don Lucino
had had one son, the latter died without issue,
leaving Don Lucino the last of his family except
for a cousin, Maximo Gatdula, of Tondo, who
also had no issue alive.

Don Lucino had a very interesting bit of
tradition regarding the pacto de sangre
between Legaspi and Lakandola which he
claimed was in written form and was later
buried beneath the Magallanes monument
with other papers. This story I was never able
to verify in any way, though I worked on it for
years.

The story cites the Magallanes Monument
which was moved by the Americans to a
site by the shore of the Pasig River. The
Magallanes monument itself, as much
symbol of Spanish hegemony on the Legazpi-
Urdaneta Monument, would itself be
obliterated in the Battle of Manila in 1945.

2005), 1.

ENDNOTES

[1J Archaeologist Colin Renfrew defines a
polity as a political organization, a self-
governing group of people, generally
occupying a well-defined area. Laura
Lee Junker emphasizes that Philippine
polities lack the scale, complexity,
bureaucracies, institutionalization, and
economy systems similar to Southeast
Asian kingdoms and states.” Their
structures are more consistent with the
characteristics of a complex chiefdom
or paramount chiefdom (from Laura
Lee Junker, Raiding, Trading, and
Feasting (Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press, 1999), 67.

[2] Laura Lee Junker, “Integrating History

and Archaeology in the Study of
Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms,”
International Journal of Historical
Archaeology 2, no. 4 (1998): 292.

[3] Ibid., 309.

[4] Ibid., 310.

[5] Blair and Robertson, The Philippine

Islands: 1493-1803: Volume III 1569-
1576 (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark,
1903), 148.

[6] Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through

Archaeology,” in Manila: Selected
Papers of the 1 7th Annual Manila
Studies Conference August 13- 14,
2008, ed. Bernardita Reyes Churchill
(Quezon City: Manila Studies
Association, Inc., 2008), 5.

[7] Jose Victor Torres, Ciudad Murada: A

Walk Through Historic Intramuros
(Manila: Vibal Publishing House,

[8] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of

the Philippine Archipelago,” Southeast
Asia: From Prehistory to History, ed.
Ian Glover (East Sussex: Psychology
Press, 2004), 270.

[9] Paz, “Defining Manila Through

Archaeology,” 33.

[10] Ibid., 13.

[11] Bacus, “The Archaeology of the
Philippine Archipelago,” 270.

[12] “Pre-Spanish Manila Through
Archaeology,” Philam Life Magazine,
accessed June 17, 2015, http://
ofmphilarchives.tripod.com/idlO.html.

[13] Bacus, “The Archaeology of the
Philippine Archipelago,” 270.

[14] Paz, “Defining Manila Through
Archaeology,” 12.

[15] Bacus, “The Archaeology of the
Philippine Archipelago,” 270.

[16] “Pre-Spanish Manila,” Philam Life
Magazine, http://ofmphilarchives .
tripod.com/idl0.html.

[17] Paz, “Defining Manila Through
Archaeology,” 13.

[18] Patricio N. Abinales and Donna J.
Amoroso, State and Society in the
Philippines (Maryland: Rowman and
Littlefield, 2005), 37.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Antoon Postma, “The Laguna
Copper-plate Inscription: Text and
Commentary,” Philippine Studies 40,
no. 2 (1992).

[21] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in
Manila Prior to Colonial Control,”

Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in
Southeast Asia 2, no. 1 (1987): 151.

[22] Ibid., 151.

[23] Luciano P. Santiago, “The Houses of
Lakandula, Matanda, and Soliman
(1571 - 1898): Genealogy and Group
Identity,” Philippine Quarterly of
Culture and Society 18, no. 1, (1990):
44.

[24] E.P. Patanne, The Philippines in the 6th
to the 16th Centuries (Manila: LSA
Press, 1996), 127.

[25] Junker, “Integrating History and
Archaeology,” 307.

[26] Antoon Postma is an anthropologist
who is best known for his work in the
Laguna Copper Plate Inscription (LCI).

[27] Postma, “The Laguna Copper-plate
Inscription: Text and Commentary,”
Philippine Studies 40, no. 2 (1992):
187.

[28] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 38.

[29] Timothy James Vitales, “Archaeological
Research in the Laguna de Bay area,
Philippines,” Hukay 18 (2013): 54-66.

[30] Ibid., 54-81.

[31] Ibid.

[32] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 37.

[33] Patanne, The Philippines in the 6th to
the 16th Centuries.

[34] Bacus, “The Archaeology of the
Philippine Archipelago,” 270.

[35] Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior
to Colonial Control,” 151.

[36] Junker, Raiding, Trading, and Feasting,
104.

[37] Ibid., 106.

* Patricio Abinales, a historian, further

describes Manila was a trading center

within the orbit of Brunei, a sultanate
located at the north coast of Borneo.

[38] Luciano P. Santiago, “The Houses of
Lakandula, Matanda, and Soliman
(1571 - 1898): Genealogy and Group
Identity,” Philippine Quarterly of
Culture and Society 18, no. 1 (1990):
42-43.

[39] Angel P. Bautista, “The Archaeology of
Maestranza Site, Intramuros, Manila,”
in Manila: Selected Papers of the 1 7th
Annual Manila Studies Conference
August 13- 14, 2008, ed. Bernardita
Reyes Churchill (Manila: National
Commission for Culture and the Arts,
2008), 37.

[40] Blair and Robertson, The Philippine
Islands III, 102.

[41] Newson, Conquest and Pestilence in
Early Spanish Philippines, 118.

[42] Bacus, “The Archaeology of the
Philippine Archipelago,” 270.

[43] Newson, Conquest and Pestilence in
Early Spanish Philippines, 118.

[44] Blair and Robertson, The Philippine
Islands III, 73-104

[45] Ambeth Ocampo, “Pre-Spanish
Manila,” Inquirer, June 18,

2015, http://opinion. inquirer,
net/inquireropinion/columns/
view/20080625-144587/Pre-Spanish-
Manila.

[46] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 50.

[47] Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior
to Colonial Control,” 151.

[48] Bacus, “The Archaeology of the
Philippine Archipelago,” 270.

[49] Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior
to Colonial Control,” 151.

[50] Junker, “Integrating History and

Archaeology,” 307.

[51] Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior
to Colonial Control,” 151.

[52] Newson, Conquest and Pestilence in
Early Spanish Philippines, 118.

[53] Paz, “Defining Manila Through
Archaeology,” 5.

[54] “Philippine pottery shard reveal
early writing,” The Southeast
Asian Archaeology Neivsblog,
accessed June 24, 2015, http://
www.southeastasianarchaeology.
com/2008/09/24/philippine-pottery-
shard-reveals-early-writing/.

[55] Angel P. Bautista et ah, “Update on
the Archaeological Excavation at
Iglesia de San Ignacio Site, Intramuros,
Manila Exposition of Archaeological
Features and Retrieval of Artifacts
and Ecofacts”, Manila: Selected
Papers of the 23rd Annual Manila
Studies Conference, ed. Bernardita
Reyes Churchill (Manila: National
Commission for Culture and the Arts,
2015), 45.

[56] Blair and Robertson, The Philippine
Islands III, 97.

[57] Pacis et. al., Founders of Freedom, 12.

[58] Blair and Robertson, The Philippine
Islands III, 105.

[59] Ibid., 153.

[60] Ibid., 173.

The Evolution of Manila

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 444th foundation day of
the City of Manila, June 24, 2015]

INTRODUCTION

There are two Manilas: the precolonial polity 111
whose foundations, if there was anything
left at all, were buried in memory, and the
Spanish “Walled City,” the Manila known as
Intramuros. What we commemorate on Araw
ng Maynila was the founding of the Spanish
Manila. According to National Artist for
Literature Nick Joaquin, it was the “Manila
we remember, the Manila of Rizal and the
Revolution, the last great creation of Spain in
the Philippines.” 121

Joaquin pointed out that for contemporary
Filipinos, the quest to understand Manila
places us in a position “like the archaeologists
who, searching for the ‘real’ Troy, found
seven different Troys, one beneath the other.
And we realize how many, many Manilas
have come and gone, unknown to us.”

Similarly, the name Manila has changed,
leading to debates over which name —
Maynila or Maynilad — is the right one. 131

Before the arrival of the Spaniards in 1570,
two polities were situated on the delta at
the mouth of the Pasig River, opening up to
Manila Bay. The north bank of the river was
Tondo, while the south bank (of the present
site of Fort Santiago) was Manila. Manila
was guarded by a fort with a defensive fence
of earth and coconut tree trunks at the point
of the delta. 141 At the time, the area served
as one of the archipelago’s main ports,
where exports were stored and imports were
redistributed through a very complex system
of trade from the sea to inland. 151 It was ruled
by three leaders: Ache or Raja Matanda
(“old raja”) and Ache’s nephew, Sulayman,
in Manila (the “young raja” who succeeded
Matanda after his death in 1572); and Ache’s
cousin, Raja Lakandula, in Tondo. 161

After several unsuccessful Spanish expeditions
to the Philippines looking for an alternative
route to the Moluccas, Miguel Lopez de
Legazpi finally succeeded in establishing a
settlement in Cebu in 1565. He then heard
of the lucrative trade in Manila Bay and sent
Martin de Goiti, a Spanish master-of-camp,
to survey the area. Upon de Goiti’s arrival,
Rajah Matanda and Lakandula agreed to let
de Goiti stay, but Sulayman refused. One day,
the Spanish fired a cannon to signal some

messengers to return to the ship, but the
Tagalogs mistook this as a sign of aggression
and fired their lantakas (bronze cannon). 171
De Goiti took the settlement by force, set it
on fire, and took the Tagalog lantakas back
to Panay, where Legazpi had established his
new settlement. 181

Just as before with de Goiti, Raja Matanda
and Lakandula welcomed Legazpi upon his
arrival in 1571, but Sulayman ordered his
people to burn their settlement and flee to
Tondo. Assuring the inhabitants of Spain’s
good will, and having the leaders declare
themselves “his friends,” 191 Legazpi claimed
the locale for Spain, formally founding the
Ciudad de Manila (the City of Manila)
where Sulayman’s settlement had been on
June 24, 1571. 1101 Philip II of Spain granted
Manila the title Insigne y siempre leal (Noble
and Ever Loyal City) in 1574, and granted
the city its coat of arms in 1596. 1111

INTRAMUROS, THE WALLED CITY

Without any stone buildings or walls to
protect it, the new city was vulnerable to
foreign attacks. For instance, in 1574, the
Chinese pirate Limahong attacked and
destroyed Manila before the settlers could
drive them off. Those who survived the attack
had to rebuild the colony. 1121 Furthermore,
fire posed a serious danger to Manila; a
serious fire in 1583 practically burned the
whole city to the ground. In 1587, to protect
Manila, Captain-General Santiago de Vera
ordered that all further structures be made of
stone, and that nipa and bamboo be replaced
with roof tile and brick. As a result, bahay
na bato (“house of stone”) were built all
over Manila. 1131 The the construction of the

stone Fort Santiago, named after the Spanish
military’s patron saint James, was ordered
built on August 9, 1589. 1141

The walls began construction in 1589 under
the tenure of Governor-General Gomez
Perez Dasmarinas. Chinese and Filipino
workers built the walls of adobe stone while
Spanish military engineer and fortification
specialist Leornardo Iturriano oversaw the
construction. The project was funded by
money from a monopoly on playing cards and
fines imposed for excessive gaming. It took
more than a century to complete the walls. By
the eighteenth century, Manila was completely
enclosed in walls, hence its name Intramuros
(“within the walls” in Latin). 1151

PHOTO: Plaza Mayor (now Plaza de Roma) in Intramuros in 1851. Palacio del Gobernador, the official residence
of the Spanish Governor-General, is seen on the right, while the Manila Cathedral is seen at the center, as left is
the Ayuntamiento. From this plaza emanated the political power of Spain over the islands. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

Intramuros became the capital of the Spanish
East Indies (Indias Orientales Espanolas),
which included the Philippines, Guam, Palau,
and the Marianas. The Walled City became the
center of political and ecclesiastical power, with
the Palacio del Gobernador, the Ayuntamiento
and the Manila Cathedral dominating.
Initially, only Spaniards were allowed to live
in Intramuros while everyone else — Filipinos,
Chinese, and other foreigners — lived in the
surrounding arrabales (suburbs), like Binondo,
San Miguel, and Santa Ana. Non- Spaniards
who worked in Intramuros entered the city
at dawn and left before midnight when the
city gates closed. However, by the latter half
of the 18th century, the segregation scheme
was abandoned. To escape the heat, wealthy
Spaniards moved out of Intramuros to the
riverside and bayside suburbs. One such
Spaniard was Luis Rocha, who in the 1750s
built his country house in the San Miguel
district on the property that would later
become the site of Malacanan Palace. 1161

Intramuros was no longer a purely Spanish
city. In 1794, it had a population of 1,456
Spanish or Spanish mestizos, 7,253 Filipinos,
and 1,075 Chinese mestizos. 1171

Intramuros was also the Asian outpost of the
galleon trade: raw materials like wood, gold,
and wax were loaded onto galleons bound
for Acapulco, while Mexican silver passed
back and forth. Ships docked in Manila Bay
and Cavite brought goods imported from
China and other Asian ports. These goods
were unloaded and delivered on barges to the
Aduana (customs house, later known as the
Intendencia) at the mouth of the Pasig River. 1181

As the Spaniards expanded their colonization,
the Walled City became part of a large
province that encompassed the surrounding
arrabales (suburbs), known as extramuros ,
and 28 other towns, some of which are
modern cities in today’s Metropolitan
Manila. 1191 The province would be known

PHOTO: Sketch of Manila and its suburbs by Emilio Godinez and Juan
Alvarez Arenas, c. 19th century. Photo courtesy of Philippine Journeys
[aenet.org]

as the Provincia de Manila. Its boundary to
the north was the province of Bulacan; to the
east, the district of Morong and Laguna de
Bay; to the south, the provinces of Laguna
and Cavite, and to the West is the Manila
Bay. [201

In 1762, two years into the war between
the United Kingdom and the Spanish
Empire, a fleet dispatched by the British East
India Company from India sailed toward
Southeast Asia to conquer colonies under
the Spanish crown. The fleet was under the
command of Rear-Admiral Samuel Cornish
and Brigadier General William Draper, and
its land forces were comprised of regiments
of British soldiers, Royal Artillery, and Indian
Sepoys. The “little army,” as Brig. Gen.
Draper described it in his journal, arrived
in the Philippine Archipelago on September
23, 1762. After a month-long siege, Manila,
capital of the colony, was finally conquered
by the British, beginning a two-year period

of British ruled 211 This was
the first time the Spaniards
had been ousted from
their Asian outpost by a
contending power. [22] The
British occupation would
extend north, incorporating
Bulacan, Pampanga, and
parts of Ilocos. It would last
for two years.

The signing of the 1763
Treaty of Paris ended the
Seven Years’ War between
the British and the Spanish.
However, it was only a
year later that Manila and
the surrounding provinces
held by the British, were turned over to the
Spanish Governor-General Simon de Anda y
Salazar.

By the 1 9th century, the Philippines was ruled
from Madrid as Mexico had revolted and
became independent in 1821. The opening
of the Suez Canal and the flow of liberal
ideas and the resolute refusal of reforms
by the abusive Spanish administration
led to growing dissatisfaction on the part
of educated and wealthy Filipinos whose
national sense had been inspired by the
suppression of the Cavite Mutiny and the
execution of Filipino secular priests, Mariano
Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora
in 1872. Jose Rizal (1861-1896), a Filipino
ilustrado, published two novels, Noli Me
Tangere and El Filibusterismo, that indirectly
fanned the flames of the revolution. By
January 1892, plans were made to assemble
a secret organization of Filipinos, led by
Andres Bonifacio of Tondo, whose goal was

independence from Spain. The organization,
the Kataastaasang Kagalang-Galangang
Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan, was
formally founded on July 7, 1982 at Tondo,
Manila, upon Rizal’s exile to Dapitan.

The Philippine Revolution began on August 23,
1896 (recent scholarship by Jim Richardson,
among others, suggests it erupted on August
24 [23][24 ]), upon the discovery of the Katipunan
by Mariano Gil, a Spanish Augustinian
curate, on August 19. This resulted in open
revolution. The entire Province of Manila,
including seven other provinces — Laguna,
Cavite, Batangas, Pampanga, Morong, Tarlac,
and Nueva Ecija — were declared under
martial law and in a state of war by the
Spanish Governor-General Ramon Blanco on
August 30, 1896. [251

By the latter part of 1897, Aguinaldo was
forced by advancing Spanish forces to
retreat to the mountains of Biak-na-Bato,
where he established the headquarters of his
government. A peace agreement was finally
settled through the Pact of Biak-na-Bato
with the Spanish authorities. The pact was
signed on December 16, 1897, agreeing for
the Revolutionary leaders to go into exile in
Hong Kong and surrendering their arms in
exchange for reforms, financial indemnities
and pardons. The occasion was marked by
celebrations in Manila and a Te Deum in the
Manila Cathedral in Intramuros. Aguinaldo
and his companions departed for Hong Kong
on December 24, 1897.

The pact put a temporary end to the conflict.
The hope that reforms would be implemented
by Spain went unfulfilled since neither side
was willing to abandon armed conflict; they

were just biding for time and resources.
The Spanish administration, meanwhile,
did not implement the reforms the Filipinos
demanded, such as the secularization of the
clergy and Filipino representation in the
Spanish Cortes.

Meanwhile, Spain was entangled into a
larger conflict upon the destruction of the
American warship USS Maine in Havana,
Cuba on February 15, 1898. Spain formally
declared war on the United States on April
23, 1898; the United States made its own
declaration two days later. [26) As the book
Malacanan Palace: The Official Illustrated
History summarizes, Malacanan Palace,
the seat of the Governor General of the
islands, was abandoned for Intramuros, as
“preparations were made in feverish haste
to withstand the American fleet which was
known to be in Hong Kong.” [27 J

U.S. Commodore George Dewey destroyed
the antiquated Spanish fleet in Manila Bay
on the morning of May 1, 1898. Commodore
Dewey kept the Spanish trapped in
Intramuros on the seaside while General
Emilio Aguinaldo, who arrived aboard the
USS McCulloch from Hong Kong on May 19,
resumed the revolution and held the Spanish
back on land, encircling them in Intramuros.
[2SI Thus, Manila was not threatened during
the first phase of the revolution.

Finally, on June 12, 1898, the Proclamation
of Independence was issued, the national
flag and anthem solemnly presented to the
people, and a dictatorial government by
General Aguinaldo was established. In the
proclamation, the Province of Manila was
listed as one of the eight provinces that

revolted against the Spanish
that was represented in the
eight rays of the sun on the
Philippine flag. 1291 Research
presented to the Centennial
Conference of 1998 suggests
that upon the formation of
the Philippine government in
Malolos, Filipinos went out
in droves from Intramuros
to join the new republic.

Meanwhile in Manila, rations
were running dangerously
low for the 70,000 people
crammed inside the Walled City, and the
constant fear of an impending massacre dealt a
harsh blow to the morale of the city’s defenders.
By the time U.S. Major General Wesley
Merritt came with the rest of the American
expeditionary force to take the city after a three-
month siege, the Spanish condition had grown
desperate. 1301 Commodore Dewey negotiated
with the Spanish Governor-General Fermin
Jaudenes through the Belgian consul, and
after a short staged battle, called the “Mock
Battle of Manila,” to satisfy Spanish “honor”
at Fort San Antonio Abad on August 13,
1898, the Spanish surrendered and the
Americans captured Intramuros. 1311 This
effectively denied the Filipinos Intramuros.

Following the surrender of the Spanish,
the Americans immediately turned their
attention to keeping General Aguinaldo’s
men out of Manila. Filipino forces, who had
been told to stay in the suburbs and out of
the battle, were furious at being barred from
entering the city. 1321

Tensions grew between the Filipino and the
American forces. On February 4, 1899, at
8:00 p.m., U.S. Private William Grayson
and Private Orville Miller of Company D
of Nebraska Volunteers patrolled the area
between Barrio Santol and Blockhouse 7 (now
corner of Sociego and Silencio streets, in Sta.
Mesa) within the Province of Manila! 331 Three
Filipinos appeared and Grayson shouted at
them to stop their advance. The Filipinos, not
understanding English, continued. Grayson
then fired at them, killing Filipino corporal
Anastacio Felix of the 4th Company of the
Morong Battalion under Captain Serapio
Narvaez. An exchange of fire ensued along
the American lines at Sta. Mesa, beginning
the Philippine- American War.

By 10:00 p.m., anticipating the conflict, the
Americans were fighting two miles north and
west of Pasig River. On February 5, 1899,
they pushed northward to Caloocan to block
the main road to Malolos, the capital of the
First Republic. This effectively established
American control over the Province of
Manila.

On February 22, 1899, President Emilio
Aguinaldo led an attack on Manila by
burning the wealthy districts of Sta. Cruz,
Tondo and Malate. Fire spread to Escolta
but was averted. Ultimately the plan failed
for lack of coordination and firepower.

THE AMERICANIZATION OF MANILA

On July 31, 1901, the Second Philippine
Commission (known as the Taft Commission,
appointed by U.S. President William
McKinley) passed Act No. 183, also known
as the City Charter of Manila, or the Manila
Charter, which patterned the city government
after the District of Columbia in the United
States. Under Section 4 of the Manila Charter, a
Municipal Board composed of three members
(of which one would become the president of
the board or city mayor) and a secretary, all
appointed by the Civil Governor, was placed
in charge of the city. 1341 Arsenio Cruz Herrera,
a pro-American lawyer who had previously
represented Manila at the Malolos Congress
and became Director of Public Instruction
under the Malolos Republic, was appointed
as the first Mayor of Manila by William
Howard Taft, the first Civil Governor. The
rest of the Municipal board was American:
Barry Baldwin and William Tutherly, with
A.T.B. Davies as secretary. 1351

Act No. 183 also absorbed the suburbs to
create a larger City of Manila. Intramuros
was no longer the capital city of the
Philippines, but one of the eleven districts
of the new Manila. 1361 The districts of the
new Manila were Paco, Malate, Ermita,
Intramuros (in the pre-war period, identified
by the initials “W.C.” or “Walled City”),
San Miguel, Sampaloc, Quiapo, Santa Cruz,

Binondo, San Nicolas, and Tondo; Santa Ana
and Pandacan were added in 1902. 1371 Under
Section 65 of the Manila Charter, each of the
districts had one representative appointed by
the Civil Governor to serve in the Advisory
Board, whose duty it was to bring “special
needs of the city” to the attention of the
Municipal Board. 1381 However, relations
between the Advisory Board and the
Municipal Board were (more often than not)
tense, because the former was more inclined
to advance local interests while the latter was
pro-American. 1391

Spanish influence in the city was still
prevalent, from the Catholic churches and
schools to Intramuros, which was patterned
after a medieval fortress. Carmen Guerrero
Nakpil, in her biography, Me, Myself,
Elsewhere, she writes of the persistence
of Spanish culture in Ermita, Manila, even
amidst the backdrop of American influence:

Our Christmas season was out of sync with
the rest of the Anglo-American world that had
recently adopted us. We had never heard of
Santa Claus, there were no Christmas trees in
our houses and the Christmas presents on the
day Christ was born came from our godparents
(only one or two each and not droves of
politicians) as a carryover from baptism. We
observed the novena of early morning Masses,
midnight Mass and media noche, but the big
day (gifts-wise) was January the 6th ....

The earlier town fiesta, on the seventeenth
of December commemorated the yearly
campaign, which had been waged for 200
years, consisting of a procession to Intramuros
to protest the taking of the image of the
Nuestra Senora by Legazpi's soldiers in May

1571. It was a massive, colorful demonstration,
addressed to the Archbishop and the clergy
in Intramuros, who had retained the image
since and installed it in the Cathedral. Every
year, Ermitenses, strewing flowers along the
way, marched to Intramuros, pleading for the
return of the Virgin and called it Bota Flores
(bota being an early form of throw, a pelting
of flowers).

When the image was returned sometime
in the 19th century, Ermita continued the
tradition of the annual procession within the
town, without the march to the Walled City,
with the young men in sailor costumes and
the girls in Filipino dress ... Instead of Santa
Claus or 'Jingle Bells,’ we had authenticity. 1403

If Manila was to become a destination
for American tourists, bureaucrats, and
businessmen, the Americans would have to
redevelop Manila into a city that conformed
to the American way of life. 1411

Chicago architect Daniel H. Burnham,
who had previously designed the famous
Union Station in Washington, D.C., was
commissioned to adapt Manila and Baguio
to American standards. Burnham set sail for
Manila on October 13, 1904, accompanied
by his wife, his youngest daughter, his close
friend Edward Ayer from Chicago, and his
assistant Pierce Anderson. On March 14,
1905, Burnham wrote to a friend about his
sojourn in Manila and Baguio:

The dive into the Orient has been like a dream.
The lands, the people, and their customs are
all very strange and absorbing of interest. It
surprises me to find how much this trip has
modified my views, not only regarding the

extreme East, but regarding our European
precedents. It will take time to get a true
perspective of it all in my mind ... The Manila
scheme is very good. The Baguio scheme is
emerging and begins to warrant a hope of
something unusual among cities. [42]

On February 19, 1905, Burnham returned
to San Francisco and immediately devoted
his attention to preparing a plan for Manila
with Anderson. His goal was to make a
city plan “remarkable for its simplicity and
its cognizance of Philippine conditions.” 1431
By 1903, Manila’s population had swelled
to 223,029 people, but Burnham expected
this to grow even further once trade and
agricultural production increased. He
planned a city for a projected population
of 800,000. 1441 To address this, Burnham’s
plan listed the following for improvement:
waterfront parks and parkways, the city’s
street system, construction of buildings,
waterways, and summer resorts. 1451 However,
as one recent study pointed out, “The plans
for Manila ... lack solutions for issues such as
low-income, housing, poverty, and mobility.”

Because Burnham did not have enough time
to see his plans executed, he chose in his stead
William E. Parsons, a young architect who
had studied at Yale University and the famous
Ecole des Beaux-Arts in France. Parsons
became Consulting Architect under Act
No. 1495 of the Philippine Commission. 1461
Among Parsons’ accomplishments in Manila
were the Philippine General Hospital, the
Manila Hotel, the Army and Navy Club,
the Normal School, and the Young Men’s
Christian Association (YMCA). 1471

Manila became a city with American enclaves

and one whose official civic and social
architecture adopted American influences.
But, nowhere in Burnham’s plan for the
redevelopment of the city did it address the
Manila slums, where poor Filipinos were
susceptible to fire and epidemics. 1481 By 1939,
the Manila population had reached nearly
one million, exceeding Burnham’s plan. 1491

National Library (according to the Burnham
Plan). With a revision of the building design
by Architect Juan Arellano, the building
became known as the Legislative Building,
an iconic structure, next to the Agriculture
and Finance Buildings — buildings designed
according to the city planning of Burnham.
The plan however never pushed through.

Meanwhile, Filipinos still aspired for
independence. What they fought for in
the battlefield in the Philippine-American
War, they took on in politics, as Americans
opened elections for local government
positions to Filipinos. Afterward came a
gradual expansion of national legislative
representation, beginning with the Philippine
Assembly (or Lower House) in 1907, which
regularly assembled in the Ayuntamiento
building in Intramuros.

It was not until the Jones Law of 1 916 that the
pledge of eventual independence was made.
The legislation led to the creation of an all-
Filipino legislature composed of the Philippine
Senate and House of Representatives. In
1926, the legislature moved into what was
originally intended to be the building of the

Manila went on to become the
cosmopolitan capital of the country when
the Commonwealth of the Philippines was
inaugurated on November 15, 1935, with
Senate President Manuel L. Quezon elected as
President. The Commonwealth, the ten-year
transitional government to independence,
was the culmination of efforts to secure a
definitive timetable for the withdrawal of
American sovereignty over the Philippines.

PHOTO: Daniel Burnham’s plan of Luneta (now
Rizal Park), animated courtesy of the Official
Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines.

MANILA DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR

President Manuel L. Quezon was in Baguio,
recovering from an illness, when Executive
Secretary Jorge Vargas informed him — at
three in the morning of December 8, 1941,
Philippine time — of the Imperial Japanese
forces’ attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii,
2:30 a.m., local time.

At 6:20 a.m., Japanese aircraft attacked
Davao. At 8:30 a.m., Baguio and Tuguegarao
and Tarlac were simultaneously attacked by
the Japanese. By the close of December 8,
the Japanese army had bombed airfields in
Zambales, Clark Field Pampanga, and Fort
McKinley on the outskirts of Manila.

The next handful of days would be marked by
the first volley of attacks by Japanese troops.
Japanese planes would repeatedly bomb
Nichols Field, destroying vital American
aircraft on the ground, and the Cavite Navy
Yard, heavily damaging the American naval
fleet stationed in the Philippines. In Manila,
there was widespread paranoia and panic.

Evacuation centers were full, while droves of
people moved to the provinces! 501

On December 24, 1941, the United States
Army Forces in the Far East (USAFFE) High
Command and the Commonwealth War
Cabinet withdrew to Corregidor Island. On
December 26, 1941, in an effort to spare
further damage to the city of Manila and its
civilians, Manila was declared an Open City
by Field Marshal Douglas MacArthur. All
military installations were ordered removed,
as local police was left to maintain order.
This was ignored by the Japanese as they still
dropped bombs in the city, causing fire and
damage! 511 Military units moved to Bataan
and the government moved to Corregidor
in the last ditch effort to defend Manila Bay
while waiting for reinforcements that would
never come.

On January 1, 1942, from Corregidor,
President Manuel F. Quezon issued Executive
Order No. 400, s. 1942, creating the City of
Greater Manila, a precursor to Metropolitan
Manila. The Greater Manila encompassed
the following cities: City of
Manila, Quezon City, and
all the territory comprised
in the municipalities
of Caloocan, San Juan,
Mandaluyong, Makati,
Pasay, and Paranaque.
The mayors of these cities
became assistant mayors of
the Greater Manila, with
their jurisdiction remaining
on their respective cities.
This was done in the light
of the impending Japanese
invasion. Meanwhile, there

PHOTO: A cartoon by artist Severino Marcelo portraying the life of city
population during the Japanese Occupation, featured in The Sunday
Times Magazine dated April 16, 1967. Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Museum and Library.

was a breakdown of peace and order, as
looting, accumulation of garbage, and
food shortage were experienced by the city
population. 1521

The next day, the Imperial Japanese forces
occupied the city without resistance,
establishing the Japanese Military
Administration over Manila and other
occupied provinces on the same day.

The City of Manila would remain under
Japanese control until the 1945 Battle of
Manila, waged from February 3 to March 3,
1945, which decimated much of the city. The
battle, fought by the combined forces of the
Filipino guerrillas and the U.S. army, against
the Imperial Japanese forces, razed the city to
the ground. At least one hundred thousand
men, women, and children perished.
Architectural heritage was reduced to
rubble, thus making Manila the second most
devastated Allied capital of World War II,
after Warsaw, Poland. William Manchester,
historian and author of American Caesar
said,

The devastation of Manila was one of the great
tragedies of World War II. Of Allied capitals in
those war years, only Warsaw suffered more.
Seventy percent of the utilities, 75 percent
of the factories, 80 percent of the southern
residential district, and 100 percent of the
business district was razed. [53]

Civil government was finally restored and
turned over by Field Marshal MacArthur
to President Sergio Osmena on February
27, 1945, in a solemn ceremony at the
Malacanan Palace.

PHOTO: A visual 3D map of the destruction of
the city during the 1945 Battle of Manila by artist
Rodolfo Y. Ragodon, featured in The Sunday Times
Magazine dated April 23, 1967. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

POST-WAR MANILA

After the war, Manila undertook the
painstaking task of restoration, as important
government buildings were slowly rebuilt.
Meanwhile, Intramuros fell into decay,
as the old historic quarter was plagued by
squatters and container vans, and religious
orders sold the sites of their churches, and
even the ruins themselves, for sand and
gravel. High-rise buildings were also built in
disregard of laws following the traditional
Spanish architecture. The remaining walls
of Intramuros were also quarried for new
structures. In 1966, in an effort to restore
the historic Manila, the National Historical
Institute (now the National Historical
Commission of the Philippines) undertook
restoration of the walls of Intramuros, with
the help of the Intramuros Restoration
Committee and the Armed Forces Ladies’
Committee. In 1979, President Ferdinand
E. Marcos issued Presidential Decree No.
1616, s. 1979, which created the Intramuros
Administration to oversee the restoration
and maintenance of Intramuros as a cultural
and historical landmark. 1541

Manila’s status also changed
after the war. On July 17,

1948, President Elpidio
Quirino signed Republic
Act No. 333, which moved
the capital from Manila
to Quezon City, as was
originally planned by
President Quezon.

In 1949, Manila’s mayoralty,
which was previously by
presidential appointment,
became elective by virtue
of Republic Act No. 409, s. 1949. The first
mayoral election of Manila was held in 1951,
with Arsenio Lacson, congressman of the 2nd
district, winning the polls. A symbolic focal
point of democracy became Plaza Miranda in
Quiapo, the country’s foremost public square
in the post-war years. A plaza fronting the
Quiapo Church, and located no more than
a kilometer from Malacanan Palace, Plaza
Miranda became the largest venue from
which rallyists could be physically close to
the residence of the country’s chief executive,
whether in loyal support or oppositionist
denunciation, providing a political forum of
Philippine democracy. The plaza eventually
lost its prominence beginning with the
bombing of 1971.

On November 7, 1975, President Ferdinand
E. Marcos established Metropolitan Manila
by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 824,
s. 1975. It was created on the precedent of
the creation of the Provincia de Manila and
the city of Greater Manila. Metro Manila
covers the cities of Manila, Quezon City
(the nation’s capital at the time), Pasay,
Caloocan, Makati (formerly San Pedro

de Macati), Mandaluyong, San Juan, Las
Pinas, Malabon, Navotas, Pasig, Pateros,
Paranaque, Marikina, Muntinlupa, Taguig,
and Valenzuela.

A year later, the seat of the national
government was moved from Quezon
City to “Manila and the area prescribed as
Metropolitan Manila” through Presidential
Decree No. 940, which was signed on May
29, 1976.

Today, Manila remains the capital city of
the Philippines, but the administrative and
political centers of the national government
are spread throughout Metro Manila with
the executive (Malacanan Palace) and the
judiciary (Supreme Court) both in Manila
while the legislative branch is located in
two separate locations: The House of
Representatives in Quezon City and the
Senate in Pasay City.

ENDNOTES

[1J Polity, according to Colin Renfrew,
is a political organization, a self-
governing group of people, generally
occupying a well-defined area. Laura
Junker emphasizes that Philippine
polities lack the scale, complexity,
bureaucracies, institutionalization, and
economy systems similar to Southeast
Asian kingdoms and states.” Their
structures are more consistent with the
characteristics of a complex chiefdom
or paramount chiefdom (from Laura
Lee Junker, Raiding, Trading, and
Feasting (Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press, 1999), 67.

[2] Nick Joaquin, “The other Manila,”

Rappler, June 22, 2015, http://www.
rappler.com/life-and-style/3 1 863-the-
other-manila.

[3] Ambeth Ocampo, “Pre-Spanish Manila,”

Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 25,
2008, accessed June 18, 2015, http://
opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/
columns/view/20080625-144587/Pre-
Spanish-Manila.

[4] Jose Victor Z. Torres, Ciudad Murada:

A 'Walk Through Historic Intramuros
(Manila: Intramuros Administration
and Vibal Publishing House, 2005), 3.

[5] William Henry Scott, Barangay:

Sixteenth -Century Philippine Culture
and Society (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University, 1994), 207.

[6] Ibid., 192.

[7] Torres, Ciudad Murada, 4.

[8] Emma Helen Blair and James Alexander

Robertson, The Philippine Islands,
1493-1803 VolIII, 1569-1576, June
22, 2015, http://www.gutenberg.org/
files/13616/13616-h/13616-h.htm.

[9] Emma Helen Blair and James Alexander

Robertson, The Philippine Islands
Volume III (Ohio: Arthur H. Clark
Company, 1903), 154.

[10] Torres, Ciudad Murada, 4.

[11] Ibid., 5.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Greg Bankoff, “A Tale of Two Cities:
The Pyro-Seismic Morphology of
Nineteenth-Century Manila,” in
Flammable Cities: Urban Conflagration
and the Making of the Modern World,
eds. Greg Bankoff, Uwe Liibken, and
Jordan Sand (Madison, WI: University
of Wisconsin Press, 2012), 172.

[14] Shirley Fish, The Manila- Acapulco
Galleons: The Treasure Ships of the
Pacific (Milton Keynes: AuthorHouse
UK, 2011), 189.

[15] Torres, Ciudad Murada, 6.

[16] Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malacahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Manila: Studio 5 Publishing, 2005),
34-35.

[17] Kiyoko Yamaguchi, “The Architecture
of the Spanish Philippines and the
Limits of the Empire,” in Investing in
the Early Modern Built Environment:
Europeans, Asians, Settlers and
Indigenous Societies, ed. Carole
Shammas (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 132-
133.

[18] Torres, Ciudad Murada, 7.

[19] Ibid., 1.

[20] Santiago Ugaldezubiaur, Memoria
descriptiva de la provincia de Manila,
June 22, 2015, https://archive.org/
stream/memoriadescriptOOugalgoog#
page/n22/mode/2up

[21] Draper was Colonel in 1762. http://
www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.

php ?title= 1 762_-_British_expedition_
against_Manila

[22] “The British Conquest of Manila,”
Presidential Museum and Library,
accessed June 22, 2015, http://
malacanang.gov.ph/the-british-
conquest-of-manila/.

[23] Milagros C. Guerrero, et ah,
“Balintawak: The Cry for a
Nationwide Revolution,” Sulyap
Kultura 2 (1996): 13-21.

[24] Jim Richardson, The Light of
Liberty: Documents and Studies on
the Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Manila:
Ateneo de Manila University Press,
2013), 263.

[25] Pedro S. de Achutegui and Miguel A.
Bernad, Aguinaldo and the Revolution
of 1896 (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 1972), 13.

[26] David F. Trask, The War with Spain
in 1898 (Lincoln, NE: University of
Nebraska Press, 1981), 57.

[27] Quezon III, et al., Malacahan Palace,
103.

[28] James H. Blount, American Occupation
of the Philippines 1898/1912 (Manila:
Solar Publishing Corporation, 1991), 1.

[29] National Historical Institute, June 12,
1898 and Other Related Documents
(Manila: National Historical Institute,
2009), 31.

[30] Brian McAllister Linn, The Philippine
War 1899-1902 (Lawrence, KS:
University Press of Kansas, 2000), 23.

[31] Blount, American Occupation of
the Philippines, 83-85; Linn, The
Philippine War 1899-1902, 24.

[32] Linn, The Philippine War 1899-1902,
24-25.

[33] Benito Legarda Jr., The Hills of
Sampaloc: The Opening Actions
of the Philippine- American War,
February 4-5, 1899 (Makati City: The
Bookmark, 2001), 43-47.

[34] An Act to Incorporate the City of
Manila, Enacted by the United States
Philippine Commission, July 31, 1901
(Manila: United States Philippines
Commission, 1901), 5.

[35] Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
50-52.

[36] Torres, Ciudad Murada:, ll;Torres,

The Americanization of Manila, 52.

[37] Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
77-78.

[38] An Act to Incorporate the City of
Manila, 39-40.

[39] Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
52.

[40] Manuel L. Quezon III, “Nakpil’s
Gift to the Nation,” Philippine Daily
Inquirer, December 28, 2006, accessed
June 23, 2015, http://www.quezon.
ph/2006/12/28/the-long-view-nakpils-
gift-to-the-nation/.

[41] Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
56.

[42] Ibid., 59.

[43] Ibid.

[44] Paolo Alcazaren, “Blueprint for the
City’s Soul,” Philippine Center for
Investigative Journalism, accessed
June 23, 2015, http://pcij.org/imag/
Yearend2004/city.html.

[45] Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
64.

[46] Acts of the Philippine Commission
[Nos. 1408 to 1538, Inclusive] and

Public Resolutions, Etc. from October
19, 1905 to September 15, 1906
(Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1907), 248-249.

[47] Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
66-67.

[48] Ibid., 70-71.

[49] United Nations, Population Growth
and Policies in Mega-Cities (New York:
United Nations, 1986), 3.,

[50] Fernando Santiago Jr., “A Preliminary
Study of the History of Pandacan,
Manila, during the Second World
War, 1941-1945, ”in Manila: Studies
in Urban Cultures and Traditions, ed.
Bernardita Churchill (Manila: National
Commission for Culture and the Arts,
2007), 101.

[51] “Manila An Open City,” Trove:
Digitized Newspapers and More,
accessed June 22, 2015, http://trove.
nla .go v. au/n dp/del/article/ 59163276.

[52] Santiago Jr., “A Preliminary Study of
the History of Pandacan,” 107-109.

[53] William Manchester, American Caesar:
Douglas MacArthur, 1880-1964 (New
York, NY: Little Brown and Co.,

1978), 805.

[54] Esperanza Bunag Gatbonton,
Intramuros: A Historical Guide
(Manila: Intramuros Administration,
1980), 8.

June 12 and the

une

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website
to commemorate the 116th anniversary of
Philippine Independence, June 12, 2014]

The Republic celebrates Independence
Day on June 12. Prior to 1962, however,
Independence Day was celebrated on July 4,
to commemorate the day when the United
States recognized our independence in 1946.

The change of date was initiated on May
12, 1962, through President Diosdado
Macapagal’s Proclamation No. 28, s. 1962,
which declared June 12 as Independence
Day. In 1964, Congress passed Republic Act
No. 4166, which formally designated June
12 of every year as the date we celebrate
Philippine independence.

Many historians still debate on the
appropriate date of independence.

The earliest declaration date put forward was
on April 12,1895, made in the Pamitinan Cave
in Montalban, Rizal when Andres Bonifacio —
in the presence of some Katipunan leaders —
wrote “Viva La Independencia Filipina!” on
the walls of the cave. 111

Another contending date for Independence
Day was the Cry of Pugad Lawin, which began
the Philippine Revolution. Bonifacio, in the
presence of many Katipuneros, tore his cedula
as a sign of defiance of and independence from
Spanish colonial authorities. The earliest date
which the Cry was originally commemorated
was on August 26, 1 896. Due to the testimony
of surviving Katipuneros of that time, like
Pio Valenzuela, the official date of the Cry
was moved from August 26 to August 23.
Recent scholarship, however, suggests that
the Cry happened on August 24. 121131

Yet another contending date was the one
put forward by the Philippine Historical
Association, reasoning that the proclamation
of independence from Spanish rule in Kawit,
Cavite on June 12, 1898 (with the official
unfurling of the flag and the playing of the
national anthem) was “not dependent upon
the will and discretion of another.” 141 This
date is now the official date of Independence.

The least mentioned Independence Day was on
October 14, 1943, under the Second Republic.

Finally, there is Independence Day, as
celebrated prior to 1962 which was July 4,

1946, proclaimed at Luneta, Manila. This
was when the independence of the Philippines
was recognized by the community of nations.
This is still being observed as Republic Day.

EVENTS LEADING TO JUNE 12, 1898

In the first phase of the Philippine
Revolution led by the secret organization
known as Katipunan, Andres Bonifacio, the
organization’s leader, agreed to meet with
other Katipunan representatives of the two
factions, Magdiwang and Magdalo, at San
Francisco de Malabon, Cavite (now called
General Trias) to discuss whether to retain
the existing Katipunan or to establish a
revolutionary government. Thus, the Tejeros
Convention was formed, held on March 22,
1897 with 26 delegates. 151 Elections were held
for its officers: Emilio Aguinaldo was elected
President and Andres Bonifacio, the former
leader of the Katipunan, was elected Director
of the Interior. Initially, Bonifacio accepted
his position, but was insulted when Daniel
Tirona objected. Bonifacio declared the
proceedings of the Tejeros Convention null
and void and established a new government.
This was seen as an act of treason by the others
and Bonifacio was charged with refusing to
recognize the newly established revolutionary
government. He was arrested and sentenced
to death in Maragondon, Cavite.

The Revolutionary Government, led by
Aguinaldo, continued the revolution against
the Spaniards. At this point, the Spaniards
were of the impression that the revolution
was in decline and concentrated their efforts
on pursuing Aguinaldo and his companions.
By the latter part of 1897, Aguinaldo was
forced by advancing Spanish forces to retreat
to the mountains of Biak-na-Bato, where he

established the headquarters of his government.
A peace agreement was finally settled through
the Pact of Biak-na-Bato with the Spanish
authorities. The pact was signed on December
16, 1897, agreeing for the revolutionary
leaders to go into exile in Hong Kong and
surrendering their arms in exchange for
reforms, financial indemnities, and pardons.
Aguinaldo and his companions departed for
Hong Kong on December 24, 1897.

In Hong Kong, Aguinaldo and his
companions established a Junta, which
worked toward continuing the revolution
and gaining freedom from the Spaniards. At
the beginning of the Spanish-American War,
the U.S. Asiatic Fleet’s Commodore George
Dewey contacted Aguinaldo for help in
defeating the Spanish forces on land. Dewey
sent a ship for Aguinaldo, and he arrived
on May 19, 1898 in Cavite, consolidating
the revolutionary forces. 161 By June 1898,
Aguinaldo believed that the declaration of
independence would inspire the people to
fight more eagerly against the Spaniards,
and at the same time lead other nations to
recognize the independence of the country.
On June 5, 1898, Aguinaldo issued a decree
setting aside June 12, 1898 as the day of the
proclamation of independence.

This event took place in the Aguinaldo house,
located in what was then known as Cavite
el Viejo (“Old Cavite”, now Kawit), Cavite.
Dewey was invited but did not attend. The
Acta de la Proclamacion de la Independencia
del Pueblo Filipino was solemnly read by
its author, Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista,
Aguinaldo’s war counselor and special
delegate, in the presence of people who came
upon the invitation of the circular of the
proclamation a few weeks from the day itself.

The 21-page declaration 171 was signed by 97
Filipinos, appointed by Aguinaldo, and one
retired American artillery officer, Colonel
L.M. Johnson. Contrary to popular belief,
it was Bautista — not Aguinaldo — who
unfurled the Philippine national flag before
the jubilant crowd.

The flag was officially unfurled for the
first time at 4:20 p.m., 181 as the Philippine
National Anthem — first heard by Filipinos —
was played by the band of San Francisco de
Malabon. Composed by Julian Felipe, the
“Marcha Filipina Magdalo” — which later
became known as the “Marcha Nacional
Filipina” — had no lyrics yet. According to
Felipe, the tune was based on the “Marcha
Real,” the “Grand March” from Giuseppe
Verdi’s Aida, and “La Marseillaise” 191
reminiscent of “the old metropolis.”

Apolinario Mabini, who arrived late to the
event, objected to the proclamation, because
he felt that one man, Aguinaldo, could not
proclaim a nation’s freedom in the name of its
people; only the people themselves could do that.
Thus, Mabini led the move for more Filipino
representatives to ratify the proclamation and
make it national and representative of the whole
country. 1101 Thus, the proclamation was first
ratified on August 1, 1898 by 190 municipal
presidents from the 16 provinces controlled by
the revolutionary army. It was again ratified on
September 29, 1898 by the Malolos Congress,
the first Filipino congress that represented the
whole archipelago.

The first and last openly held Independence
Day celebration of the First Republic until
the capture of President Emilio Aguinaldo,
was on June 12, 1899 at the Pamintuan

Mansion, in Angeles, Pampanga, led by
President Aguinaldo himself. 1111 With the
defeat of the First Republic in 1901, it was
not observed publicly until 1941 when
Flag Day, which was observed on October
30 since 1919 (the year the Philippine
Legislature restored the flag) was moved to
June 12, recognizing the official unfurling of
the Philippine flag that day. From 1941 to
1 962, June 12 was observed as Flag Day until
President Macapagal’s proclamation moving
the Independence Day to June 12. In 1965,
since Flag Day coincided with Independence
Day, and in order to commemorate the date
the national emblem was first unfurled in
battle, President Diosdado Macapagal issued
Proclamation No. 374, s. 1965, which moved
National Flag Day from June 12 to May 28.

That the movement for independence was
a collective one — a national one — has
been recognized by President Benigno S.
Aquino III, as reflected in his Independence
Day commemorations of the past years
from various crucial settings. This annual
pilgrimage by the President emphasizes that
the revolution was truly national in extent
and character.

In 2011, President Aquino launched the
commemoration of the 113th anniversary of
the Proclamation of Independence in Kawit,
Cavite — where the Philippine flag was first
waved before its people, and the National
Anthem first played. In 20 12, President Aquino
headed the ceremonies from the Barasoain
Church in Malolos, Bulacan — the venue of
the Malolos Congress, which had drafted the
Constitution of our First Republic. In 2013,

President Aquino led the commemoration
from Liwasang Bonifacio. In 2014, he lead
the Independence Day celebration from
Naga City, Camarines Sur, to commemorate
the great contribution of the Bicol region
to the Philippine Revolution, signaled by
the martyrdom of Los Quince Martires —
the 15 Bicolano Martyrs — on January 4,
1897. In 2015, the President celebrated
Independence Day in Santa Barbara, Iloilo, in
commemoration of the Visayan contribution
to Philippine Independence.

ENDNOTES

[1J Esteban de Ocampo, “June 12 in the
History of the Filipinos,” June 12,

1898 and Other Related Documents
(Manila: National Historical Institute,
2009), 1.

[2] Milagros C. Guerrero et al.,

“Balintawak: The Cry for a
Nationwide Revolution,” Sulyap
Kultura 2 (1996): 13-21.

[3] Jim Richardson, The Light of Liberty:

Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Manila:

Ateneo de Manila University Press,
2013), 263.

[4] “Proclamation No. 28, s. 1962,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed May 13,

2014, http://www.gov.ph/1962/05/12/
proclamation-no-28-s-1962/.

[5] Richardson, The Light of Liberty, 323

and 325.

[6] Frank Hindman Golay, Face of Empire:

United States-Pbilippine Relations,
1898-1946 (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 1997), 23.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Arnaldo Dumindin, Philippine-American

War 1899-1902, accessed May 13,
2014, http://philippineamericanwar.
webs.com/philippineindependence.htm.

[9] Felipe said that he “purposely injected...

some melodical reminiscences of
the Spanish Royal March (into the
composition) ... in order to preserve
the memory of the old metropolis.”
Gregorio Zaide, Documentary Sources
of Philippine History Vol. 9. (Manila:
National Bookstore, 1990), 247-250.

[10] Nick Joaquin, “Mabini the Mystery,”
Philippine Free Press, July 28, 1962.

[11] Tonette Orejas, “Pamintuan
Mansion’s role celebrated,”

Philippine Daily Inquirer, June
13, 2009, http://www.inquirer.net/
specialfeatures/independenceday/view.
php ?db= 1 &article=20090613-2 10267.

the Symbols of

our National Fla

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND JUSTIN GATUSLAO

[This essay was originally published on the Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 115th commemoration of Philippine Independence, June 12, 2013]

Aside from the Masonic influence on the Katipunan, the design of the Philippine flag has
roots in the flag family to which it belongs — that of the last group of colonies that sought
independence from the Spanish Empire at the close of the 19th century s. The Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office traces the origins of the
Philippine flag’s design elements, which have been in use since General Emilio Aguinaldo first
conceived them — the stars and stripes; the red, white, and blue; the masonic triangle; and the
sun — and have endured since.

ORIGINS OF THE SYMBOLS OF THE NATIONAL FLAG

South America

Peru Uruguay

United States of America
1777

State of Texas

1836

l Flags

K * K

nai

K 3 K

MAutJA

Gregorio del Pilar Pio del Pilar

September 3, 1897 May 26, 1896

Commander’s Standards

PCDSPO I GOVPH

RELEVANT PASSAGES FROM THE PROCLAMATION OF INDEPENDENCE, JUNE 12, 1898

ORIGINAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FILIPINO TRANSLATION

Y por ultimo se acordo
unanimemente que esta
Nacion ya Independiente
desde hoy, debe usar la
bandera que hasta ahora sigue
usando, cuya forma y colores
se hallan descritos en el
adjunto debujo, con el remate
que representa al natural
las tres referidas armas
significando al triangulo
bianco como distintivo de la
celebre Sociedad “Katipunan”
que por medio de pacto
de sangre empuja a las
masas a insurreccionarse;
representando las tres estrellas
las tres principales Islas de
este el archipielago, Luzon
Mindanao y Panay en que
estallo este movimiento
insurreccional; indicando el
sol los agigantados pasos que
han dado los hijos de este pais
en el camino del progreso y
civilization, simbolizando
los ocho rayos de aquel las
ocho provincias — Manila,
Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga,
Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna,
y Batangas — declaradas en
estado de guerra apenas se
inicio la primera insurrection,
y conmemorando los colores
azul, rojo, y bianco lo del la
bandera de los Estados Unidos
de la America del Norte, como
manifestation de nuestro
profundo agradecimiento
hacia esta Gran Nacion por
la desinteresada protection
que nos presta y seguira
prestando. Y imprimando
dicha bandera la presente a
los Senores congregados.

And finally it was resolved
unanimously that this Nation,
already independent from
today should use the same
flag which it has used, whose
shape and colors are described
in the attached drawing
rendering realistically the
three aforementioned forces
representing the white triangle
as the distinctive symbol
of the famed Society of the
Katipunan, which through
the blood compact impelled
the masses to rise in revolt;
the three stars representing
the three principal islands
of this Archipelago — Luzon,
Mindanao, and Panay in which
the revolutionary movement
broke out; the sun indicating
the gigantic steps taken by
the children of this country
on the road to progress and
civilization; the eight rays
symbolizing the eight provinces
- Manila, Cavite, Bulacan,
Pampanga, Nueva Ecija,
Bataan, Laguna, and Batangas
— which declared themselves
in a state of war almost at
the very start of the uprising;
and the colors of blue, red,
and white commemorating
the flag of the United States
of North America as a
manifestation of our profound
gratitude towards this Great
Nation for its disinterested
protection which it lends
us, and continues to lend
us. And, carrying this flag, I
unfurl it before the gentlemen
assembled here — [List of
names of the delegates] — and
we all solemnly swear to
acknowledge and defend it to
the last drop of our blood.

Sa huli, napagkasunduan ng
lahat na ang Bayang ito, na
malaya na mula sa araw na ito,
ay dapat gamitin ang watawat
na dati nang ginagamit nito,
na may disenyo at kulay na
inilalarawan sa inilakip na
guhit: Ang tatlong panig na
makikita rito ay tiyak na
sumasagisag sa puting tatsulok
na simbolong nagbibigay-
pagkakakilanlan sa bantog na
kapisanang “Katipunan,” na
sa pamamagitan ng sanduguan
ay nagpasiklab sa pag-aalsa
ng masa; ang tatlong bituin
na kumakatawan sa tatlong
pangunahing isla ng Arkipelago
- Luzon, Mindanao, at Panay
kung saan nagsimula ang
mapanghimagsik na kapatiran;
ang araw na representasyon
ng mga dambuhalang hakbang
na isinagawa ng mga anak ng
bayan sa landas ng kaunlaran
at kabihasnan; ang walong
sinag na sumisimbolo sa
walong probinsiya-Manila,
Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga,
Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna,
at Batangas-na nagdeklara
ng digmaan, nang unang
masindihan ang mitsa ng
himagsikan; at ang mga kulay
na bughaw, pula, at puti, na
lahat ay nagsisilbing paggunita
sa watawat ng Estados Unidos
sa Hilagang Amerika, bilang
pagpapakita ng malalim na
pasasalamat sa Dakilang Bansa
na nagkaloob at nagkakaloob
ng walang pag-iimbot na
pagtatanggol. At sa ganang
ito, inihaharap ngayon itong
watawat sa mga Ginoong
nagtitipon.

The flags of the world can be divided into
families; in turn, each family traces its design
origin to its influences for nationalist and
other ideological movements. The Philippine
flag, as it was conceived by President Emilio
Aguinaldo, adopted the color palette of
the flag of the United States — red, white,
and blue 111 — together with other elements
derived, in turn, from the flag of the State
of Texas, elements that are shared by the
Philippine, Cuban, and Puerto Rican flags.
All three countries sought independence
from the Spanish Empire at the close of the
19th century, and bore a close affinity for the
republican revolution that gave birth to the
United States of America.

PHOTO: A 1943 Commonwealth propaganda poster
printed in the United States. The poster seems to
suggest that Cuban blue is the shade used for the
Philippine Flag. Photo taken from Bataan Magazine.

WE WILL ALWAYS FIGHT FOR FREEDOM!

The symbolism of the Cuban flag is uncannily
similar to that of the Philippine flag: The three
blue stripes, represent the three parts of Cuba
that initially broke away from the Spanish
Empire; the triangle is a masonic symbol
signifying liberty, equality and fraternity,
the ideals of the French Revolution; the red
color stands for the blood shed by Cuban
nationalists. The Cuban flag was designed by
General Narciso Lopez, a Venezuelan-born
Cuban nationalist who organized a liberation
expedition to wrest Cuba from the Spanish
dominion, and his companion, Miguel Teurbe
Tolon. It was first unfurled on May 19, 1850.
[2] It was not coincidental that the Lone Star
of Cuba and the stars on the American flag
are similar, since Lopez lived in the United
States and he aimed for Cuba’s annexation
to the United States. 131 Although the Lopez-
led revolt was ultimately unsuccessful, his
flag was nonetheless adopted as the nation’s
standard when Cuba achieved independence
on May 20, 1902d 4]

Cuba’s revolution was an inspiration to
Filipino revolutionaries in many ways: Jose
P. Rizal wanted to go there under the cover
of being a surgeon to study how the fighting
was going on; 151 the Cuban constitution
was studied by Filipino revolutionaries; 161
American interest in the Cuban cause was
considered a good omen for the Filipino
cause. Indeed, the history of the Cuban
revolution echoes in so many ways our own,
with an on-again, off-again quality to it,
ending with temporary success with the help
of the Americans, yet both countries ending
up as protectorates of the United States.

Peculiar to the family to which our flag
belongs is the problem of a definitive and

uncontested shade of blue, which partly
stems from ideological differences between
movements and advocates. In Puerto Rico,
for example, advocates of the retention of
Commonwealth status for the island, and
those advocating independence from the
United States, pushed for different shades of
blue for the island’s flag.

Debates like this remain prevalent, given
historiographic limitations: in our case, the
missing original drawing of the flag unfurled
in Kawit; the loss of the actual flag; different
oral and written approximations of the shade
of blue as well as watercolor illustrations. As
for contemporary examples, they represent
problems not unique to those faced by the
Philippine flag: The materials used by flag
manufacturers change over time (in the 19th
century, and for our first flag, silk was used;
thereafter, canvas was used; presently, nylon
is used — all these involve textiles and dyes
that do not necessarily lend themselves to
standardized colors or even textures); a lack
of documentation; and the problem of the
flags being originally designed with the flag
of the United States in mind.

In the Philippines, there is the question
of whether the flag should have blue and
red in American or Cuban hues. Although
samples of the Philippine flag dating back
to the era exist, they invariably use the
American shades of blue and red; and,
given the family to which the flag belongs,
there remain historians who passionately
advocate the use of the Cuban colors. In
1985, President Ferdinand E. Marcos tried
to change the shade of blue used in the
flag to pale sky blue, 171 but this was never
popular and was explicitly rejected after the

EDSA People Power Revolution of 1986. 181
With the Centennial of the Proclamation of
Independence in 1998, however, the colors
of the flag were revised on the advice of
historians who’d long advocated a change.
But instead of specifically Cuban colors,
royal blue was used.

The flag, as part of the Cuban and Puerto
Rican heritage, the use of a Masonic
triangle — a design element that can be
traced to the maritime flags used in Spanish
colonial ports at the time. Both Manila and
Iloilo, the islands’ main ports in the 1850s,
had maritime flags used for navigation in
Philippine waters. The maritime flag for the
port of Havana, Cuba, has stripes.

Both the Manila and Iloilo maritime flags
were also swallowtail flags — flags that
feature a v-shaped cut similar to the tail
feathers of the eponymous bird — and had
blue and red stripes, respectively. This shape
can be inferred to have easily provided
a template for flags used on land: both
in Cuba and Puerto Rico, and later, by
Katipunan commanders in their military
campaigns. For example, one of the most
iconic revolutionary flags was the personal
standard of General Gregorio del Pilar, one
of the youngest commanding officers in the
revolutionary forces and later the Philippine
Army, who used a red and black swallowtail
form with a blue triangle filling in the
v-shaped portion. It was under this standard
that the “boy general” would be felled in a
valiant attempt to delay the Americans and
buy time for President Aguinaldo’s retreat.
Earlier, General Pio del Pilar (no relation to
Gregorio), used a solid red swallowtail form
and added a white triangle with three K’s

at each point, symbolizing the Katipunan.
At the center of the triangle was the first
time an eight-rayed sun was portrayed in a
revolutionary standard, representing the first
eight provinces in Luzon that rose up in arms
against Spain.

Another borrowing from the flag family is
the mythical sun, in use by Latin American
republics Argentina, Peru, and Uruguay.
Although seemingly independent of the
Cuban example, the anthropomorphic sun is
similar to that of an 1823 Masonic society
called the Soles y Rayos de Bolivar (Suns
and Rays of Bolivar) — a secret association
that, although was not led by Simon Bolivar,
strongly supported the Latin American
liberator’s ideals and political maneuverings. 191

PHOTO: Seal of the Katipunan (left) Argentinian
Coin (right). Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic
Planning Office.

The iconography of the Latin American revolts
against Spain would have been familiar to
Filipinos. Coinage from ex-colonies of Spain
regularly reached the Philippines, requiring
the coins to be defaced by the authorities
in Manila. 1101 However, even these attempts
to obscure the symbols of governments that
had been former Spanish colonies couldn’t
fully obscure their symbols, ranging from

suns of liberty, to liberty caps, and mottoes
inspired by the French Revolution. 1111

Masonic influences came to the Philippines
by way of the ilustrados — or “enlightened
class” — of the Philippines, who either had
the means to study in Europe or were sent
to Spain under an educational program
sponsored by the Spanish Government in the
mid-19th century. 1121 There they had learned
about liberalism and political movements
that challenged traditional institutions of
religion, monarchy, and aristocracy. One
of the organizations that heavily influenced
the ilustrados was Freemasonry — a fraternal
society with its own rituals, symbols,
and emblems, and which, furthermore,
welcomed Filipinos into its ranks. Many
of the ilustrados became Freemasons, and
upon returning home from their European
sojourns had brought back the same zeal for
reform that had swept the Old World and
shaken its feudal fiefdoms. 1131

This new class of reform-minded intellectuals
soon thereafter founded lodges in the
Philippines too, and from their ranks rose more
militant movements such as the Katipunan.
Notably, Andres Bonifacio and General
Emilio Aguinaldo, the primary leaders of the
Katipunan, were themselves Freemasons, and
the flags brandished by their commanders
showed considerable masonic influences
throughout the revolution.

One example of this influence is the Light
of Liberty symbol, a hand-drawn Katipunan
symbol on documents depicting the Baybayin
syllabic character “Ka” with sixteen rays
bursting forth from the letter. The “Ka” may
probably mean Katipunan, but could also

mean “Kalayaan” or “Liberty.” The design
is reminiscent of the masonic sun symbol . 1141

The circular and cosmopolitan nature of
our Revolution, then, is aptly and ably
demonstrated by our flag: a triangle,

representing the Katipunan and, in turn, an
iconization of the ideals, trends, and events
that inspired it — from the Eye of Providence
in the Great Seal of the United States that
inspired the Masonic Triangle and which,
in turn, came to be enshrined in the motto
of Revolutionary France — Liberte, Egalite,
Fraternite — and prominently enshrined
in the flags of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the
Philippines; the stripes and colors derived
from the American flag, the banner of
the first republican revolution against
European monarchy; the sun and stars of the
revolutionary banners of the former colonies
of Spain: all these combined to create a
national flag that has endured and has been
enshrined in our nationhood.

PHOTO: Seal of Biak-na-Bato government (top).
Federal Republic of Central America coin circa
1824 (bottom). Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic
Planning Office.

ENDNOTES

[1J "... y conmemorando los colores azul,
rojo, y bianco lo del la bandera de
los Estados Unidos de la America
del Norte ...” Proclamation of
Independence, June 12, 1898.

[2] Alex Anton and Roger Hernandez,

Cubans in America: A Vibrant History
of a People in Exile (New York, NY:
Kensington Books, 2002), 39-40.

[3] Junius P. Rodriguez, ed., Slavery in the

United States: A Social, Political, and
Historical Encyclopedia, Volume 1 (Santa
Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2007), 376.

[4] Louis A. Perez, Cuba Between Empires,

1878-1902 (Pittsburgh, PA: University
of Pittsburgh Press, 1983), xv.

[5] Leon Ma. Guerrero, The First Filipino:

A Biography of ]ose Rizal (Manila:
National Historical Institute, 2008),
383-384.

[6] Ibid., 314.

[7] “Executive Order No. 1010, s. 1985,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, February 25, 1985,
accessed March 7, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/1985/02/25/executive-order-no-
1010-S-1985/.

[8] “Executive Order No. 292, s. 1987,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, July 25, 1987, accessed
March 7, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1987/07/25/executive-order-no-
292-S-1987/.

[9] Mark Abendroth, Rebel Literacy: Cuba’s

National Literacy Campaign and Critical
Global Citizenship (Duluth, MN: Litwin
Books, 2009), 26.

[10] Angelita Ganzon de Legarda, Piloncitos
to Pesos: A Brief History of Coinage in
the Philippines (Manila: Regal Printing
Company, 1976), 33.

[11] Ibid., 34.

[12] Noel Teodoro, " Rizal and the
Ilustrados in Spain,” Asian and Pacific
Migration Journal 8, nos. 1-2 (1999):
65-80.

[13] Koichi Hagimoto, Between Empires:
Marti, Rizal and the Intercolonial
Alliance (New York, NY: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2013), 131-136.

[14] Jim Richardson, The Light of Liberty:
Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Manila: Ateneo
de Manila University Press, 2013),
xxiii.

History of the
Philippine Fla

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, JUSTIN GATUSLAO, AND MARK BLANCO

1899 -1901

Proclamation of Independence
[June 12. 18981

1901-1907

Cessation of
Hostilities

1907-1919

Act No. 1696

(August 23, 1907]

1943-1945

Act No. 1 7
Second Republic

* *

1946 -1978

Commonwealth Act
No. 731 I July 3, 1946)

Commonwealth of the
Philippines

1978 -1985

Presidential Decree
No. 1413, s.1978
(June 9. 19781
Bagong Lipunan

1998 - Present

Republic Act No. 8491

Fifth Republic

(February 12. 1998)

1998 - Present

Republic Act No. 8491
(February 12. 1998)

Timeline of Philippine Flags
Timeline of Coats of Arms

lWKAIK.il PLANNING OFflCE

DcfiED

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 115th commemoration of
Philippine Independence, June 12, 2013]

REVOLUTIONARY BEGINNINGS

1898 - 1901

On May 28, 1898, 1 111 nine days PI after the
return of General Emilio Aguinaldo from
exile in Hong Kong, Filipino troops were
once again engaged in a battle against
Spanish forces in Alapan, Cavite. It was in
this skirmish that the Philippine flag was first
unfurled as the revolutionary standard. Sewn
in Hong Kong by Filipino expatriates and
brought to the country by Aguinaldo, the flag
was a tri-color featuring red and blue with a
white triangle framing three yellow stars and
an anthropomorphic eight-rayed sun. [3]

Half a month later, on June 12, 1898,
following the proclamation of independence
from Spain, the same flag was waved by at
Aguinaldo’s residence in Kawit, Cavite, as
the Marcha Nacional Filipina played. 141

Throughout the Second Phase of the
Philippine Revolution and the subsequent
Philippine- American War that lasted until the
capture of Aguinaldo in 1902, the flag of the
same design was flown with the red field on
top to denote a state of war. Aguinaldo wrote
about this unique feature of the Philippine

flag in a letter to Captain Emmanuel A. Baja
dated June 11, 1925:

Several press representatives called on me
then to inquire as to how the Flag should be
flown. I answered them that it should be always
hoisted with the blue stripe up in time of peace.
But on the battlefields and in camps during the
past war, first with Spain and then with the
United States of America later, our National
Flag had been hoisted with the red stripe up. [5]

Upon Aguinaldo’s capture on March 23,
1901, [6] the First Philippine Republic was
abolished; the American Insular Government,
under the jurisdiction of the U.S. War
Department, was established. 171 With the
war over and Philippine leaders officially
accepting American sovereignty over the
islands, the Philippine flag was flown with
the blue field on top. It was to be displayed
that way henceforth during peacetime.

1901 - 1907

AMERICAN OCCUPATION AND THE
COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT

For six years, the Philippine flag and other
banners and emblems of the Katipunan continued
to proliferate. In response, the Philippine
Commission, dominated by Americans, passed
Act No. 1696 or the Flag Faw of 1907 on
August 23, 1907, [8] which outlawed the

display of the Philippine flag and replaced
the country’s flag to the stars and stripes
of the United States of America. The same
law prohibited the playing of the Philippine
national anthem. [9]

It took twelve years [101 until the Philippine
Legislature, finally in the hands of elected
Filipino representatives and senators,
repealed the Flag Law via Act No. 2871,
on October 22, 1919. 1111 Following this, the
Philippine flag as the official standard of the
nation was reinstated through Act No. 2898
authored by Rafael Palma and approved
Governor-General Francis Burton Harrison
on October 30. 1919. 1121 Modifications
were made to Aguinaldo’s flag: The sun no
longer had anthropomorphic features, and
its rays were stylized. This design would be
used from 1919 until the inauguration of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines in 1935.

From 1919 to 1941 Flag Day was celebrated
on October 30 of every year by virtue of
Proclamation No. 18, issued by Governor-
General Francis Burton Harrison in
commemoration of the day the Flag Law was
repealed.

Months after the inauguration of the
Commonwealth, President Manuel L. Quezon
issued Executive Order No. 23, s. 1936,
instituting the description and specifications

of the Filipino flag, which would remain
in effect until the Second World Ward 131
Throughout this period, the American and
Philippine flags flew side-by-side.

President Quezon, in 1941, moved the
commemoration of Flag Day from October
to June 12. This marks the first instance
that June 12, the date of Aguinaldo’s
proclamation, was commemorated. 1141

THE SECOND REPUBLIC AND THE SECOND
WORLD WAR

Bombing attacks on the Philippines and
the American naval base at Pearl Harbor
on December 8, 1941 (2:30 AM local
time) plunged the United States of America
into war with Japan and the Axis powers.
President Quezon issued Executive Order
No. 386, s. 1941, mandating all Philippine
flags to be flown with the red field on top to
signify a state of war. [15]

1941 - 1945

Meanwhile, the Second Philippine Republic
was established in the islands on October
14, 1943 under the auspices of the Empire
of Japan, with Jose P. Laurel serving as
president. The flag was raised by former
President Emilio Aguinaldo and General
Artemio Ricarte during the inaugural of
the Second Republic on October 14, 1943.
Laurel issued Executive Order No. 17, s.
1943, which essentially brought back the
Aguinaldo design of the Philippine flag with
the anthropomorphic sun. [161 This flag would
eventually be displayed with the red stripe up,
when President Laurel issued Proclamation
No. 30, on September 23, 1944, declaring
that the Second Republic was “ in a State of
War.” 1171

restored and with it the specifications of the
Philippine flag in accordance with Executive
Order No. 23, s. 1936. On July 4, 1946,
Philippine independence was recognized
by the United States, with the inauguration
of the Third Republic of the Philippines.
In ceremonies held at what is now Luneta,
United States High Commissioner to the
Philippines Paul V. McNutt and Philippine
President Manuel Roxas lowered the
American flag for the last time and in its
stead rose the Philippine flag to henceforth
fly alone on Philippine soil, except in military
bases still held and occupied by the United
States Armed Forces. [18] Starting May 1,
1957, the Philippine flag was raised beside
the U.S. flag in U.S. military bases in the
Philippines.

1943 - 1944

From 1943 until the end of the War in the
Pacific, two versions of the Philippine flag
existed: the Commonwealth flag used by the
Government-in-exile based in Washington,
D.C., as well as by guerrillas in the islands,
and the Aguinaldo flag used by the Japanese-
sponsored government. Following the
surrender of Japan and the liberation of
the Philippines, the latter’s use would be
discontinued with the dissolution of the
Second Republic.

In the aftermath of World War II, the
Commonwealth of the Philippines was

THIRD, FOURTH, AND FIFTH REPUBLICS

1985 - 1986

Commonwealth-era specifications, in accordance
with Executive Order No. 23, s. 1936, would
remain in effect throughout the Third and
Fourth Republics until February 25, 1985,
when President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued
Executive Order No. 1010, s. 1985, changing
the shade of blue of the Philippine Flag
from navy blue to light blue. 1191 The change
was due to a longstanding debate among
historians concerning the original shade
of blue used in the national flag. Debates
centered on whether Cuban blue (since the

flag was patterned on some aspects of Cuba’s
national flag), or sky-blue (based on written
accounts by some revolutionaries as well
as a watercolor from the era), or navy blue
(based on the colors of the American flag)
was used. Galo Ocampo, Filipino artist and
expert in Philippines heraldry, said the actual
color used — pale sky blue — owed less to
historical precedent and more to available
cloth supplies at the time.

The change in color proved unpopular.
After the EDSA People Power Revolution
of 1986, President Corazon C. Aquino
restored the pre-martial law specifications of
the National flag on July 25, 1987 through
Executive Order No. 292, s. 1987, yet
again in accordance with Commonwealth
regulations! 201 Under her term, the Philippine
Senate rejected the Bases Treaty with the
United States, thus putting an end to more
than 90 years of American military presence
in the Philippines — in particular, the
sprawling naval base in Subic Bay and the
Clark Airfield in Pampanga. As the American
flag was lowered in these areas on November
24, 1992, it marked the last time a foreign
flag would fly in Philippine territory.

Commonwealth regulations were
maintained until 1998, when Republic Act.
No. 8491 or the “Flag and Heraldic Code
of the Philippines” was enacted, changing
the shade of blue once again from navy
to royal, [21] viewed as a suitable historical
compromise to settle earlier debates. These
are the specifications in use today.

1998 - PRESENT

*lmages courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

ENDNOTES

[1J National Historical Institute,

Kasaysayan: Journal of the National
Historical Institute Volume 1, Issue 1
(Manila: National Historical Institute,
2001), 94.

[2] Arnaldo Dumindin, “May 19,

1898: Emilio Aguinaldo Returns,”
Philippine- American War, 1899-
1902, accessed March 7, 2016, http://
philippineamericanwar. webs .com/
emilioaguinaldoreturns.htm.

[3] Domingo Abella, The Flag of Our

Fathers (Manila: Milagros Romualdez
Abella, 1977), 30-31.

[4] Christi-Anne Castro, Musical Renderings

of the Philippine Nation (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2011), 28-29.

[5] Abella, The Flag of Our Fathers, 30-31.

[6] Arnaldo Dumindin, “ Capture of

Aguinaldo, March 23, 1901,”
Philippine-American War, 1899-1902,
accessed on March 7, 2016, http://
philippineamericanwar. webs .com/
captureofaguinaldo 1901 .htm.

[7] Paul A. Kramer, The Blood of

Government: Race, Empire, the United
States & the Philippines (Chapel Hill,
NC: The University of North Carolina
Press, 2006), 164.

[8] Pura Villanueva Kalaw, A Brief History

of the Filipino Flag (Manila: Bureau of
Printing, 1947), 10.

[9] “Act No. 1696,” Official Gazette

of the Republic of the Philippines,
August 9, 1907, accessed March
7, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/
downloads/1 907/08aug/l 9070823-
ACT-1696-GOVGEN.pdf.

[10J Jose Quirino, “ How our flag flew
again, June 9, 1956,” The Philippine
Free Press, accessed on March 7, 2016,
https://philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 956/06/09/how-our-flag-flew-
again-june-9-1956/.

[11] “Act No. 2871,” Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines, October
22, 1919, accessed March 7, 2016,
http://www.gov.ph/1919/10/22/act-no-
2871-S-1919/.

[12] Kalaw, A Brief History of the Filipino
Flag, 11-12.

[13] “Executive Order No. 23, s. 1936,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, March 25, 1936, accessed
March 7, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1936/03/25/executive-order-no-23/.

[14] Manuel L. Quezon III, “Speech:
Philippine Columbian Quezon Night
Celebration,” Manuel L. Quezon III
(blog), August 19, 1999, accessed
March 7, 2016, http://www.quezon.
ph/1 999/08/1 9/speech-philippine-
columbian-quezon-night-celebration/.

[15] “Executive Order No. 386, s. 1941,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, December 18, 1941,
accessed March 7, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/ 1941/12/1 8/executive-order-no-
386-S-1941/.

[16] “Executive Order No. 17, s. 1943,”

Presidential Museum and Library,
accessed on March 7, 2016, http://
malacanang.gov.ph/5783-executive-
order-no-17-s-1943/.

[17] “Proclamation No. 30, proclaiming
the existence of a state of war in the
Philippines,” The Lawphil Project,
accessed March 7, 2016, http://www2.
austlii.edu.au/~graham/AsianLII/
Philippines/executive/Proclamations/
proc_30_1944.rtf.

[18] Blue Book of the First Year of
the Republic (Manila: Bureau
of Printing, 1947), 4-6, https://
archive.org/detailsBluebookOf
TheFirstYearOfTheRepublic_20 1 505 .

[19] “Executive Order No. 1010, s. 1985,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, February 25, 1985,
accessed March 7, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/1985/02/25/executive-order-no-
1010-S-1985/.

[20] “Executive Order No. 292, s. 1987,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, July 25, 1987, accessed
March 7, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1987/07/25/executive-order-no-
292-S-1987/.

[21] “Republic Act No. 8491,” Official
Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, February 12, 1998,
accessed on March 7, 2016, http://
www.gov.ph/1998/02/12/republic-act-
no-8491 /.

Tejeros Convention

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

[This essay was originally written for
the revised and expanded edition of the
Philippine Electoral Almanac, ivhich was
published in 2015]

The two rival factions of the Katipunan,
started out as mere sangguniang balangay
(councils). Andres Bonifacio presided over
the founding of both. The Magdiwang was
formed in Noveleta, Cavite on April 2,
1896; the Magdalo, in Kawit, Cavite, on
April 3, 1896. Due to their rapid growth
in membership, the two branches were
elevated by the Kataastaasang Sanggunian
(Katipunan Supreme Council) to the status
of sangguniang bayan (provincial councils),
after which the two groups were authorized
to form balangays under them and to
expand their influence. The rift between
the two groups grew when Spanish forces
assailed Cavite in the latter part of 1896;
the rift grew further after the liberation
of Cavite. 111 The two factions began their
own regional government with separate
leaderships, military units, and “mutually
agreed territories.” The rivalry was limited
to the province of Cavite and some parts of

Batangas because these areas were already
liberated and thus revolutionists could freely
move and convene. The rift never culminated
into violence. At times, the two groups were
cordial and fought side by side against their
common foe, the Spaniards. 121

On March 22, 1897, two rival factions of
the Katipunan, the Magdiwang and the
Magdalo, met at the administration building
of the friar estate in Tejeros, San Francisco
de Malabon in Cavite. 131 The meeting on
March 22 had clear objectives, according to
the memoirists Artemio Ricarte and Santiago
Alvarez: the planned defense of the liberated
territory of Cavite against the Spanish, and
the election of a revolutionary government.
The meeting was first presided over by Jacinto
Lumbreras, a member of the Magdiwang
faction, who would later yield the chair
to Bonifacio when it came time to address
the reorganization of the revolutionary
government. The Katipunan was a well-
organized revolutionary movement with
its own structure and officers. It had an
established system that included provincial
units. But during the Imus assembly

of December 31, 1896, proposals to either transform and revise the organization of the
Katipunan or replace it with a revolutionary government organization fomented.

Only three months since the Imus assembly had convened, Bonifacio once again took his
place as presiding officer for the same purpose of assessing the kind of governing structure
the Katipunan needed in order to best fulfill its goals. In Imus, no resolution was made despite
an attempt to determine what the revolutionary government would be. The convention in
Tejeros, on the other hand, successfully organized an assembly of predominantly Magdiwang
members to elect leaders for the revolutionary government. While no one knows the total
number of delegates present in the historic event, 26 names were recorded, 17 of whom
were from Magdiwang (according to Santiago Alvarez), 141 and 9 from Magdalo (according
to Emilio Aguinaldo and Carlos Ronquillo). [s] Ronquillo also noted that many unnamed
participants were in the upstairs area of the estate house “filled to capacity.” Some of the
present were also from parts of Batangas and some provinces to the north. Hence it is difficult
to determine the exact number of voters present then.

According to historian Jim Richardson, a substantial number of delegates present, though
affiliated with Magdiwang, could be more accurately be tagged as “independents” who did
not necessarily support Bonifacio. [6] This brings in new factors to the election that took place.
Records only mention those who won, but not the number of votes.

The election results were as follows:

Position

Winner

Affiliation

Other Contenders

President

Emilio Aguinaldo

Magdalo

Mariano Trias (independent)
Andres Bonifacio (Magdiwang
ally)

Vice President

Mariano Trias

Independent

Andres Bonifacio (Magdiwang
ally) Severino de las Alas
(independent) Mariano Alvarez
(Magdiwang)

Captain General

Artemio Ricarte

Independent

Director of War

Emiliano Riego de Dios

Independent

Ariston Villanueva (Magdiwang
Daniel Tirona (Magdalo)
Santiago Alvarez (Magdiwang)

Director of
Interior

Andres Bonifacio

Magdiwang ally

Mariano Alvarez (Magdiwang)
Pascual Alvarez (independent)

Here is the list of the members of the Kataastaasang Sanggunian or Supreme Council in
the Katipunan prior to the election at Tejeros. The Council was composed of the four most
important positions into the Katipunan office — the pangulo, the kalihim, the tagausig, and
the tagaingat-yaman: [7]

Name

Position

Term 183

Andres Bonifacio

President (Pangulo)

1895-1896

Emilio Jacinto

Fiscal (Tagausig), Secretary (Kataastaasang
Kalihim)

1894-1895

Pio Valenzuela

Fiscal (Tagausig)

1895

Vicente Molina

Treasurer (Tagaingat-yaman)

1893-1896

Mariano Alvarez, in a letter to his uncle-
in-law, noted that fraudulence marred the
voting process in Tejeros:

[...] Before the election began, I discovered the
underhand work of some of the Imus crowd
who had quietly spread the statement that it
was not advisable that they be governed by
men from other pueblos, and that they should
for this reason strive to elect Captain Emilio
as President.

These events were greatly upstaged, in
memory at least, by the ensuing tiff that
occurred between Andres Bonifacio and
Daniel Tirona.

The latter raised provocations when he
insinuated that Bonifacio was unfit to take
on his position owing to a lack of credentials.
Tirona loudly called for the election of one
Jose del Rosario, a lawyer. The proverbial salt
had been rubbed against the wound — what
vexed Bonifacio most was not so much the
attack on his credentials but rather the lack
of due process. He had, after all, reminded
the assembly gathered at Tejeros that the will
of the majority — however divergent from
each individual’s, must be respected at all
costs.

Bonifacio’s resolve would, a day later, become
manifested in a document called the Acta
de Tejeros, which proclaimed the events at

[</ r M flint,

t Wi y '

n . •

1 1 a 4i««

'• /'/ /

/ j % iJf . At i

« KtM<4 Ala

rtA ft *r PaUy+L +4

f>U ' Jy t~f

*• ft‘ It-

y /»« «

T" _T

A r .. s —7 -g '■**

ftntt HA'

f HA i* Ua

f tnUjL4i*rat\ CA
(Av/h

<u|'

a4t tty

t \i<\y *■ ft <*f*H*^*l Suft /«*>»«

, .// (vnAi ' «»*<•»»« f «-mT

^ /*»»». »•£ r*£fl

_____

/).« ...... . “3- r/ M fylUJJ Sj

Ang Unang Puhina ng Acta da Tejeros . Marso 23, 1897

PHOTO: The first page of the “Acta de Tejeros,”
signed by Andres Bonifacio and leaders of the
KKK’s Magdiwang council on March 23, 1897, which
proclaimed that the convention held at Tejeros the
previous day had been so disorderly, so tarnished
by skullduggery, that its decisions were illegitimate
and invalid. Image courtesy of Carlos Ronquillo,
//ang talata tungkol sa paghihimagsik nang 1896-
1897, edited by Isagani R. Medina (Quezon City:
University of the Philippines Press, 1996), 98.

the assembly to be disorderly and tarnished
by chicanery. Signatories to this petition
rejected the republic instituted at Tejeros
and affirmed their steadfast devotion to the
Katipunan’s ideals. This declaration and the
intention of starting a government anew

would later cost Bonifacio his life. He would
be tried for treason by a kangaroo court and
sentenced to death at Maragondon, Cavite
on May 10, 1897.

Contentious as the events surrounding
Tejeros are, both in intention and outcome,
it was undoubtedly a pivotal moment in
Philippine revolutionary history. The first
school of thought argues that apart from
organizational structure and personality
politics, Tej eros would betray the realignment
in the leadership and goals of the revolution.
The assembly at Tejeros exposed how the
Caviteno elite had besieged the revolt of
the masses. Another perspective offers the
shift from a revolution of mystical and
masonically-organized aims to one adhering
to 18th and 19th century rationalist and
deist lines, imbued with the characteristics of
principalia used to command.

ENDNOTES

[1J Jim Richardson, Light of Liberty:
Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Manila:
Ateneo de Manila, 2013), 321.

[2] Ibid., 322.

[3] Ibid., 323.

[4] Ibid., 325.

[5] Ibid., 326.

[6] Ibid., 329.

[7] Ibid., 44-45.

[8] Ibid., 416-422.

The Foundin

of the Katipimae

MARK BLANCO

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 150th birth anniversary of
Andres Bonifacio, November 30, 2013]

On July 7, 1 892, upon learning that Jose Rizal
was to be deported and that his works were
to be banned in the country, a secret council
was convened in No. 72 Azcarraga Street
(now Claro M. Recto Avenue, Manila). In
attendance were Andres Bonifacio, Deodato
Arellano, Valentin Diaz, Teodoro Plata,
Ladislao Diwa, Jose Dizon, and a few others,
all members of La Liga Filipina, a progressive
organization founded by
Rizal. The men assembled
came to the agreement that a
revolutionary secret society
must be founded, and thus
the Kataastaasang Kagalang-
Kagalang na Katipunan ng
mga Anak ng Bayan was
formally established. 111

The objectives of the
Katipunan, as the brotherhood
was popularly known, were
threefold: political, moral, and

civic. They advocated for freedom from the yoke
of Spain, to be achieved through armed struggle.
They also saw it as their personal responsibility
to help the poor and the oppressed, and to teach
them good manners, hygiene, and morality.

New recruits to the secret society underwent
a rigorous initiation process, similar to
Masonic practices. A neophyte, dressed in
black and accompanied by his sponsor, was
brought to a small room decorated with
patriotic posters (1), in front of a cabinet
draped in black. He was then seated at a
dimly-lit table, on which rested a bolo (2),

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

a revolver (3), and a set of questions which
he must answer to the satisfaction of the
members assembled: What was the condition
of the Philippines in the early times? What
is the condition today? What will be the
condition in the future? 121

The candidate was expected to respond that
the Filipinos were once independent, and that
the Spaniard colonizers had not improved the
conditions of the Philippines, but that soon
the Philippines would be free once more.
The master of ceremonies would once more
try to discourage him by telling him to back

down if he does not have enough courage;
should he persist, he is led blindfolded into
another room for a physical test. The final
rites involved the neophyte signing the oath
of membership in his own blood, usually
drawn from a cut made by a scalpel to the
left forearm. 131

The organizational structure of the Katipunan
entailed three ranks of membership, with
new members starting out as “katipon,” then
moving up to “kawal” and eventually to
“bayani.” Members were to pay an entrance
fee of one real fuerte, a unit of currency equal

to 1/8 of a silver real peso, as well as monthly
dues and other fees paid exclusively to the
Benefit Fund and collected at every session or
meeting.

Though the organizational structure of
the Katipunan was constantly in flux, it is
generally believed that they formed small
branches, governed by the sangguniang
balangay, and these small branches would
form larger provincial councils, governed
by the sangguniang bayan. All these would
be overseen by the Supreme Council of the
Katipunan (Kataas-taasang Sanggunian), which
was composed
of a president
(pangulo), secretary
(kalihim), fiscal
(tagausig), treasurer
(tagaingat yaman),
and six councilors
(kasanguni). 141

The legislative body
of the Katipunan
was known as the
Katipunan Assembly,
and it was composed of the members of the
Supreme Council, along with the presidents of
the popular and provincial councils. Judicial
power rested in the sangguniang hukuman,
which were provincial courts that decided on
internal matters; however, judgement on grave
matters (such as betraying the Katipunan or
committing acts penalized by the organization’s
laws) were meted by the “Secret Chamber,”
composed of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto,
and Dr. Pio Valenzuela.

Contrary to popular belief, Andres Bonifacio —
though undoubtedly one of the more prominent

Akoy si nanumpa sa ngalan ng Dios na aking gugulin ang aking buhay, ang

aking lakas, ang kaonting mga maasahan ay aking idinadamay na lahat ang pagmamahal ko sa aking
asaua, anak magulang at kapatid ay aking iguinugugol na lahat alang alang sa pag-tatangol sa ating
Inang bayan at sa pagka api ng ating lahi sa sankatagalugan at sa K.K.K. N. M.A.N.B.

Nanunumpaan naman ako sa ngalan ng Tunay na Dios na hindi ko tatalikdan at hindi ko uurungan
ni kahit isang hakbang at aking ipamamana sa aking anak at apo na susundin ko na ualang tutol at
piquit mata at sa catunayan aking tatalaan ng tunay na dugo na mangagaling sa aking tunay na puso.

by Pedro S do Achulegui, SJ, and Miguel A Bernad. SJ)

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

Recruitment methods

[ Hasik :] “triangle" method

Members were to recruit two new adherents (who would not know each other but only the onginal
member who took him In), thus building a network ol "triangles.” This was to ensure that growth would
be discreet, while at the same time ensure that the new recruits would closely adhere to the principles
of the Katipunan.

Two-tier sanggunian structure

The triangle method provided for slow growth. Around October 1892, it was decided that members would
be allowed to recruit as many persons as they could.

IKf MOINTIAI COMMUNICATIONS DIVIlltfMlNf ANO SIHAllUK KANNINC Off If!

Katipon (Member)

OUTFIT:

Black hood, with a triangle of white ribbons,
inside ol which were the letters Z. LI. B.

PASSWORD:

Anak rig Bayan

MONTHLY DUES:

One real fuerte (old money), or
12.5 centimos, or 20 cuartos

’May be promoted to Kawal upon
recruiting several new members

Kawal (Soldier)

OUTFIT:

| Green hood, with a triangle of white lines
At the three angles were the letters Z. LI. B.

Q Suspended from the neck was a green nbbon
with a medal, with the letter K In the ancient
Tagalog script Inscribed In the middle.

PASSWORD:

Gom-Bur-Za

MONTHLY DUES:

Twenty centavos

I I

v /

* May bo promoted to Bayani
upon becoming an olticer

Bayani (Patriot)

OUTFIT:

| Red mask, with white triangle, inside of which
was the following:

K K.
z Li e

Q Red sash with green borders

PASSWORD:

Rizal

MONTHLY DUES:

Two real luertes (old money), or
25 centimos, or 40 cuartos

UCATIOM!

MINT AND STMndC PLANNING OffICI

Kataastasang Sanggunian

Sangguniang Balangay

WHO WAS WHO IN THE

GUILLERMO MASANGKAYS LIST OF KATIPUNEROS AT BALINTAWAK,
♦ AUGUST 1896 ♦

Draftsmen Master Tailor Railway baggage Playwright Student Warehouse

Master employee

8 B

Physician Milk Seller Municipal

Captain

14 15 16 17 18

Tobacco Workers Master

Tobacco Worker

11 12 13

Army Government Grass Cutter

Corporal treasury

caretaker

10 20 21

Master Government Arsenal

Cigar Worker Employee

Printers Mechanics

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Clerks Fire Department Fire Department

Lieutenant Captain

40 41 42 43 44

Kuridor Assistant to Property Owners Government Secret Agents

(Buyer and Seller) Court of First

Instance Judge

50 51 52 53

tt II

11 11

t t t

f~l I— I

Customs Guard
sergeants

Sales

Agent

Salesman Customs Guards

Customs Officials

NAMES AND OCCUPATIONS

NAME OF KATIPUNERO OCCUPATION

Melecio Ruestra

Draftsman

Pastor Santos

Draftsman

Salustiano Cruz

Master tailor

Procopio Bonifacio

Railway baggage-master

Juan de la Cruz

Playwright; Barber

Emilio Jacinto

Student

Andres Bonifacio

Warehouse employee at Frcssel & Co.;
walking cane maker; calligrapher

Pio Valenzuela

Physician

Vicente Leyva

Milk seller

Ramon Bernardo

Municipal captain of Pandacan

Geronimo Medina y Cristobal

Army corporal

Vicente Molina

Government treasury caretaker

Miguel Resurreccion

Grass (fodder) cutter

Patricio Belen

Tobacco worker

Crispulo Chacon

Tobacco worker

Lorenzo Martinez

Tobacco worker

Tomas Villanueva

Tobacco worker

Pio H. Santos

Master tobacco worker

Tomas Alegre

Master cigar maker

Roman Ramos

Government arsenal employee

Tito Miguel

Government arsenal employee

Aguedo del Rosario

Printer (Diario dc Manila)

Apolonio Cruz

Printer (Diario de Manila)

Alejandro Santiago

Printer (El Rcsumcn)

Deogracias Fajardo

Printer

Juan Fajardo

Printer

Rogelio Borja

Mechanic

Isaac del Carmen

Mechanic

Hilario Sayo

Mechanic

Cipriano Pacheco

Clerk

Teodoro Plata

Clerk (Mindoro Court of First Instance)

Jose Trinidad

Clerk (Tondo Court of First Instance)

Hermogenes Plata

Clerk (court clerk)

Tomas Remigio

Clerk (Government treasury)

Pantaleon Torres

Clerk (Government treasury)

Enrique Pacheco

Clerk (Manila city government)

Faustino Manalac

Clerk (Manila port administration)

Cosme Taguyod

Fire Department lieutenant

Rafael Gutierrerez

Fire Department captain

Guillermo Masangkay

Kuridor (buyer and seller)

Pedro Zabala

Kuridor (buyer and seller)

Briccio Pantas

Assistant to Court of First Instance judge

Estanislao Vargas

Property owner

Apolonio Samson

Property owner

Julio Navarro

Government secret agent

Alejandro Andaya

Government secret agent

Marcelo Badell

Government secret agent

Macario Sakay

Sales agent (personero)

Nicomedes Carreon

salesman at Casa Chofre, Cobrador

Francisco Carreon

Customs guard

Sarhento Marcelo

Customs guard

Valentin Lagasca

Customs guard sergeant

Eugenio Santos

Customs guard sergeant

Calixto Santiago

Customs official

Restituto Javier

Customs official

Hermenegildo Reyes

Customs official

*Th»« it a lisl

r of ICwipnncros who, according to an interview given by Guillermo Masangkay to the newspaper Bagong Buh.iy in 1952. were present in Balintawak around August 1896. Hus
ccd in Jim Richardson's site Katipunan: Documents and Studies, and have been translated into English front the original mi* of Tagalog and Spanish-
artist's rendition of the occupations of the Katipuncros, and though extensive research has been undertaken, there may be discrepancies in the appearances.

founders of the Katipunan — was not its first
Supremo or the President of the Supreme
Council. On July 15, 1892, the members of
the Supreme Council were Deodato Arellano
(Supremo), Bonifacio (Comptroller), Ladislao
Diwa (Fiscal), Teodoro Plata (Secretary), and
Valentin Diaz (Treasurer).

Unsatisfied with Arellano’s performance as
Supremo, Bonifacio later had him deposed,
and supported the election of Roman Basa as
Supremo on February 1, 1893. The Supreme
Council was then composed of Basa, Jose
Turiano Santiago (Secretary), Bonifacio
(Fiscal), and Vicente Molina (Treasurer).

Bonifacio would only become Supremo on
January 5, 1894, with Santiago (Secretary),
Emilio Jacinto (Fiscal), and Molina (Treasurer).
Further reorganization in 1896 led to Jacinto
becoming Secretary, and Pio Valenzuela
becoming Fiscal.

The Supreme Council in August 1896, prior
to the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution,
was led by Bonifacio as the Supremo, with
Jacinto as Secretary of State, Teodoro Plata as
Secretary of War, Briccio Pantas as Secretary
of Justice, Aguedo del Rosario as Secretary of
Interior, and Enrique Pacheco as Secretary of
Finance.

Much discussion surrounds who was actually
in Balintawak at the outbreak of the Philippine
Revolution in August 1896. Perhaps the closest
one can come to a definitive list is based on
an interview given by Guillermo Masangkay
to the newspaper Bagong Buhay in 1952,
almost 60 years after. This was reproduced in
Jim Richardson’s book, The Light of Liberty,
and have been translated into English from the
original mix of Tagalog and Spanish.

* All images rendered by the Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning Office

ENDNOTES

[1J Jim Richardson, Light of Liberty:
Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Manila:

Ateneo de Manila, 2013), 1.

[2] Ibid., 100-103.

[3] Pedro S. de Achutegui, and Miguel
Bernad, Aguinaldo and the Revolution
of 1896: A Documentary History
(Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 1972), 10.

[4] Richardson, Light of Liberty, 44-45.

Imprinting Andres Bonifacio

THE ICONIZATION FROM PORTRAIT TO PESO

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, JUSTIN GATUSLAO, AND JEAN ARBOLEDA

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 150th birth anniversary of
Andres Bonifacio, November 30, 2013]

PHOTO: The only known photograph of Andres
Bonifacio, 1896. Photo courtesy of Mr. Jim
Richardson.

The face of the Philippine revolution is
evasive, just like the freedom that eluded the
man known as its leader.

The only known photograph of Andres
Bonifacio is housed in the Archivo General de
Indias in Seville, Spain. Some say that it was
taken during his second wedding to Gregoria
de Jesus in Katipunan ceremonial rites. It is
dated 1896 from Chofre y Cia (precursor
to today’s Cacho Hermanos printing firm),
a prominent printing press and pioneer of
lithographic printing in the country, based
in Manila. The faded photograph, instead
of being a precise representation of a
specific historical figure, instead becomes a
kind of Rorschach test, liable to conflicting
impressions. Does the picture show the
President of the Supreme Council of the
Katipunan as a bourgeois everyman with
nondescript, almost forgettable features?
Or does it portray a dour piercing glare
perpetually frozen in time, revealing a
determined leader deep in contemplation,
whose mind is clouded with thoughts of

PHOTO: Undated reproduced photo of Andres
Bonifacio.

waging an armed struggle against a colonial
power?

Perhaps a less subjective and more fruitful
avenue for investigation is to compare and
contrast this earliest documented image
with those that have referred to it, or even
paid a curious homage to it, by substantially
altering his faded features.

This undated image of Bonifacio offers the
closest resemblance to the Chofre y Cia
version. As attested to by National Scientist
Teodoro A. Agoncillo and the National
Historical Commission of the Philippines,
it is the image that depicts the well-known
attribution of Bonifacio being of sangley (or
Chinese) descent. While nearly identical in
composition with the original, this second
image shows him with a refined-even weak-

AXDRfi* BOXIPACIO.

TltllMO M u Mll’ltltJk T«UU.

•t>U ftfcv'v‘vi.1

Photo taken from La llustracion Espanola y
Americana, February 8, 1897.

chin, almond-shaped eyes, a less defined
brow, and even modified hair. The blurring
of his features, perhaps the result of the
image being timeworn, offers little room for
interjection.

In contrast, the next image dating from a
February 8, 1897 issue of La llustracion
Espanola y Americana , a Spanish-American
weekly publication, features a heavily altered
representation of Bonifacio at odds with the
earlier depiction from Chofre y Cia.

This modification catered to the Castilian
idea of racial superiority, and to the waning

Spanish Empire’s shock-perhaps even awe?-
over what they must have viewed at the time
as indio impudence. Hence the Bonifacio in
this engraving is given a more pronounced set
of features-a more prominent, almost ruthless
jawline, deep-set eyes, a heavy, furrowed
brow, and a proud yet incongruously vacant
stare. Far from the unassuming demeanor
previously evidenced, there is an aura of
unshakable, even obstinate, determination
surrounding the revolutionary leader who
remained resolute until his last breath. Notice
also that for the first (although it would not
be the last) time, he is formally clad in what
appears to be a three-piece suit with a white
bowtie-hardly the dress one would expect,
given his allegedly humble beginnings.

Given its printing, this is arguably the first
depiction of Bonifacio to be circulated en
masse. The same image appeared in Ramon
Reyes Lala’s The Philippine Islands, which was
published in 1899 by an American publishing
house for distribution in the Philippines.

The records of both the Filipinas Heritage
Fibrary and the Fopez Museum reveal a
third, separate image of Bonifacio which
appears in the December 7, 1910 issue of El
Renacimiento Filipino, a Filipino publication
during the early years of the American
occupation.

El Renacimiento Filipino portrays an idealized
Bonifacio, taking even greater liberties with
the Chofre y Cia portrait. There is both
gentrification and romanticization at work
here. His receding hairline draws attention
to his wide forehead-pointing to cultural
assumptions of the time that a broad brow
denotes a powerful intellect-and his full lips

Photo taken from the December 7, 1910 El
Renacimiento Filipino, courtesy of the Filipinas
Heritage Library.

are almost pouting. His cheekbones are more
prominent and his eyes are given a curious,
lidded, dreamy, even feminine emphasis,
imbuing him with an air of otherworldly
reserve-he appears unruffled and somber,
almost languid: more poet than firebrand.

It is difficult to imagine him as the Bonifacio
admired, even idolized, by his countrymen for
stirring battle cries and bold military tactics.
He is clothed in a similar fashion to the La
Ilustracion Espahola y Americana portrait:
with a significant deviation that would leave
a telltale mark on succeeded images derived
from this one. Gone is the white tie (itself an
artistic assumption when the original image
merely hinted at the possibility of some sort
of neckwear), and in its stead, there is a

sober black cravat and even a corsage on the
buttonhole of his coat.

Here the transformation of photograph to
engraving takes an even more curious turn;
as succeeding interpretations in turn find
reinterpretation at the hands of one artist in
two media; with each interpretation in turn
becoming iconic in its own right.

For it was from contemporary history
textbooks such as The Philippine Islands
that the future National Artist for Sculpture,
Guillermo Tolentino, based his illustration,
Filipinos Ilustres, which was completed
sometime in 1911. Severino Reyes,
upon seeing the image, agreed to have it
lithographed and published in Liwayway, of
which he was the editor at the time, under
the name Grupo de Filipinos Ilustres.

Grouping prominent Filipinos together as
if posing for a formal studio portrait with
the Partido Nacionalista emblem hanging
above the group (though other versions do
not have the seal), resonated with the public;
the illustration was once a regular fixture
in most homes in the first decades of the

twentieth century. A stern, serious Bonifacio,
with wide eyes and a straight nose, is seated
between Jose Rizal and Marcelo H. del Pilar.

Filipinos Ilustres would inspire other
depictions from around the same period-
notably, Manuel Artigas’ Andres Bonifacio y
el Katipunan.

The Artigas image is
decidedly patrician in
both dress and mien,
with larger but still
almond-shaped eyes
but with a slightly
more aquiline nose,
complemented by
prominent cheekbones
and a defined jaw.

Already far-removed
from the original,
this gentrified and
respectable portrait
almost betrays

Bonifacio’s class

background and visually thrusts him into the
exclusive club of ilustrados-the reformists
who sought change from above instead of
slashing revolution.

The first depiction of Bonifacio on Philippine
banknotes (part of the English series of
currency issued by the Central Bank of the
Philippines from 1949 to 1969 and printed
by the British printing company Thomas De
La Rue & Co. Ltd.) mirrored both the Artigas
rendition and a sculpture by Ramon Martinez.
The twenty-peso bill had both Bonifacio
and Emilio Jacinto on the obverse. On the
reverse is a near-photographic depiction of
Martinez’ Balintawak monument, which

Photo reproduced
from Manuel Artigas,
Andres Bonifacio
y el “Katipunan”
(Manila, 1911)

PHOTO: Filipinos Ilustres by Guillermo Tolentino,
lithograph published through Liwayway Magazine.

the years with its use in Philippine currency,
starting with banknotes issued under the
Pilipino series, in circulation from 1969 to
1973.

was unveiled on September 3, 1911. Though
he originally intended to commemorate
the fallen heroes of the 1896 Revolution in
general, this soon became the image of one
particular man, Bonifacio, that lingered in
the minds of many.

It is almost as if, in the face of conflicting
representations, the engravers of the
banknote decided to avoid controversy by
simply depicting both. For here, the gentrified
Bonifacio appears, while the increasingly
more iconic-yet ironically not actual (because
the statue was never explicitly intended to
portray Bonifacio)- sculpture is portrayed on
the reverse of the banknote.

Flowever, it would be the El Renacimiento
Filipino adulteration, despite its provenance,
that would be lent credibility throughout

REPUBLIKA NC PILIPIUASLG096870

AG09g*Wi.~.

' :±

LIMAIMG PISO

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

The Bagong Lipunan series of President
Ferdinand E. Marcos, which was in
circulation from 1973 to 1985, would follow
this design with simple alterations.

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

This would likewise be featured alongside
the portrait of Apolinario Mabini on the ten-
peso bill released in 1997, which the Bangko
Sentral ng Pilipinas has since demonetized.

Bonifacio’s image undergoes another re-
imagining altogether in Philippine coinage-
following conventions established, this time
in sculpture, by Guillermo Tolentino.

There was, however, a re-ordering of
the hierarchy of heroes. While Rizal was
enshrined as the foremost hero by the
construction of the Rizal Monument, the
second (in scale and artistic ambition)

grander monument was that of Bonifacio in
1933. In contrast, there were no monuments
dedicated to Emilio Aguinaldo, very much
alive, mired as he was in the partisan politics
of the 1920s. The era of monumentalism for
Aguinaldo would begin only in the 1960s,
with the transfer of Independence Day to June
12 in 1962, the renaming of Camp Murphy
to Camp Aguinaldo in 1965, and Aguinaldo’s
donation of his mansion to the Filipino
People shortly before his death. President
Marcos consciously adopted the Malolos
Republic with its unicameral legislature
and strong presidency as the historical
antecedent for his regime, inaugurating the
Interim Batasan Pambansa on June 12, 1978;
and transferring the start of official terms to
June 30 from Rizal Day (which had been the
date since 1941). The looming centennial
of the Proclamation of Independence kept
the spotlight on Aguinaldo, and with it, the
promotion of Aguinaldo in the hierarchy of
banknotes: formerly it had been Rizal on the
basic unit of currency, the Peso, followed by
Bonifacio on two pesos. With the abolition
of the two peso coin, Bonifacio was reduced
in rank, so to speak, to share the ten peso
banknote while Aguinaldo was promoted, so
to speak, to the five peso coin.

In 1983, Emilio Aguinaldo replaced Bonifacio
on the five-peso bill, and the Bangko Sentral
ng Pilipinas (BSP) minted a unique, octagonal

Photos courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

two-peso coin

featuring Bonifacio.

This was in
circulation from 1983
to 1990, re-released
in a smaller, circular
form from 1991 to
1994. Bonifacio is
more stern and masculine in profile, with a
kerchief knotted around his neck.

The current bimetallic 10-peso coin, first
minted in 2000, is similar in design to the
10-peso bill with Bonifacio and Mabini.

The image on the coins is most likely sourced
from the 45-foot tall bronze monument
that bears his name in the City of Caloocan,
sculpted by Guillermo Tolentino, who was
already middle-aged by this time-the second
time the artist had featured Bonifacio in his art.

PHOTO: The bronze Bonifacio Monument in
Monumento, Caloocan City designed by National
Artist for Sculpture Guillermo Tolentino (under
the alias “Batang Elias”) for a 1929 contest. Photo
courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

Here, at what was once the entrance to
Manila before the era of the expressway,
stands a calm Bonifacio, dressed in an
embroidered Barong Tagalog and knotted
kerchief, with a bolo in one hand, a revolver
in the other, surrounded bysurrounded by
Emilio Jacinto and two other Katipuneros,
symbolizing the Cry of Pugad Lawin.

Tolentino’s work was the culmination of
extensive research and consultations not
just with Bonifacio’s living contemporaries,
but also with the occult through seances and
espiritistas. The artist also based his sculpture
on Bonifacio’s sister Espiridiona.

The Bonifacio of Tolentino was done in
the classical sense, expressing almost no
emotion-a cool, calculating, even serene
leader in the midst of battle. Napoleon
Abueva, a student of Guillermo Tolentino,
offers an alternative interpretation: that
Bonifacio’s quiet dignity and confidence
evokes the resilient spirit of Filipinos.

The monument itself was a purely Filipino
project from start to finish, proposed by
Bonifacio’s fellow revolutionary leader
Guillermo Masangkay in the Philippine
Legislature, and funded by Act No. 2760 s.
1918, which also enacted Bonifacio Day as a
national holiday. Inaugurated on Bonifacio’s
birthday in November 30, 1933, it presaged
the transition to independence.

F HEBRA

Spfrtal

ENTRE

FUERTE

if'/Z/jiMufaii* W< dy ^

^ BATAAN

CIGARS 6Cl6Af?l'T£S

FACTORY
. KAN KM ANC (.CD

PHOTO: Packaging for Balintawak Cigarrillos.

bolo, in the other, the flag of the Katipunan.
He is clothed in red pants and an unbuttoned
camisa chino.

This is in stark contrast to the aforementioned
Ramon Martinez monument in Balintawak,
which was transferred to Vinzons Hall in
the University of the Philippines Diliman
campus in 1968. Here, a lone figure stands
barefoot with his arms outstretched, mouth
open in a silent cry to arms. In one hand, a

This image of Bonifacio would endure in
popular consciousness, appearing in even
the unlikeliest of places, such as in cigarette
boxes.

National Artist for Painting Carlos V.
Francisco seemingly strikes a balance between

both renditions in his famous mural Filipino
Struggles Through History, 1964. While
the fiery revolutionary in camisa chino and
rolled-up red pants resemble the monument
that previously stood in Balintawak, he also
holds a bolo and a revolver, reflecting the
research undertaken by Tolentino.

Amidst the bustling environs of Divisoria
in Manila, another side of the President of
the Supreme Council is given prominence-
poring over a piece of parchment, here is the
Bonifacio who wrote impassioned manifestos
that rallied the masses. The Katipunan flag
waves in the background.

Discrepancies abound even in the
commemorative memorabilia released for
the Bonifacio centenary in 1963. While the
Philippine Postal Corporation evoked the
defiant Katipunero of Ramon Martinez’s
creation, the BSP chose to follow the serene
figure of Tolentino’s monument. Notice that
on the stamps marking Bonifacio’s Centenary,
he is in what is considered the trademark,
though hardly definitive, Katipunero attire;
while the coin shows him clad in a suit and tie.

PHOTO: Commemorative stamps issued by the
Philippine Postal Corporation in 1963. Image
courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

ANDRES BONIFACIO

PHOTO: Commemorative stamps issued by the
Philippine Postal Corporation during Bonifacio’s
death centenary in 1997. Image courtesy of the
Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

PHOTO: Commemorative coins issued by the
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas during the centenary
of Bonifacio in 1963. Image courtesy of Wikimedia
Commons.

Commemorative memorabilia were likewise
released for his death centenary in 1997.
The stamps would now feature the various
monuments that have been erected to pay
tribute to Bonifacio-the calm Bonifacio
of Tolentino’s creation, the fiery Bonifacio
in Martinez’s sculpture and the pensive
Bonifacio that stands in Tutuban.

Written accounts are similarly inconclusive
when it comes to the physical characteristics
of Bonifacio-none of his contemporaries nor
the historians who specialized in the study of
the Katipunan are able to provide a concrete
description of Bonifacio.

Through the multiple visualizations and
renditions of Bonifacio, we may never truly
know how he looked. But revolutions are
waged not by faces-rather, by the faceless
hundreds and thousands who took up arms
with the notable and the noted. In death,
a definitive image of Bonifacio remains
elusive, which presents a concluding irony:
that the man unfortunate in battle, achieved
his true glory not through the sword, but
the pen, through the manifestos and letters
that ignited revolutionary ardor, sustaining
the revolution in times of adversity, and,
regardless of the eventual means for
achieving independence, lives on in the
hearts and minds of every Filipino who has
read the words of Maypagasa-Bonifacio’s
nom de guerre, which encapsulated in one
word, what he himself sought to represent
and inspire in his countrymen.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agoncillo, Teodoro. The Revolt of the
Masses. Quezon City: University of the
Philippines, 1956.

May, Glenn Anthony. Inventing A Hero: The
Posthumous Re-creation of Andres Bonifacio.
Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1997.

Ocampo, Ambeth R. Bonifacio’s Bolo.
Manila: Anvil Publishing Inc., 1995.

Tolentino, Guillermo E. Facing History.
Kalipunan ng Sining at Kultura ng Pasig,
Inc., 2003.

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND SASHA MARTINEZ

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
ISOth birth anniversary of Andres Bonifacio,
November 30, 2013]

On November 30, 2013, we celebrated the
sesquicentennial of Andres Bonifacio’s birth,
we also commemorated the 80th anniversary
of the unveiling of one of the country’s most
enduring landmarks, one of the nation’s
most impressive works of art — a fitting
tribute to the man known as the father of the
Philippine Revolution.

In Caloocan City, four major thoroughfares
ring a soaring monument of granite and
bronze — a memorial to Andres Bonifacio,
the emblematic father of the Philippine
Revolution and once the President of the
Supreme Council of the Katipunan.

The monument has stood for eighty years —
first a solitary rise in the expanse of Caloocan,
and over the years a lynchpin for the city’s
landscape to form itself around. It has lent
its very name to the area now dotted by
establishments that had once almost furtively
crept toward it, and which now threaten
to tower over its Winged Victory perched
forty-five feet from the ground. Glancing
at the monument enveloped in the shadows
cast by these new and ever-newer buildings,
pedestrians and commuters circle around it,
barely looking up, even as those in vehicles
consider it more obstacle than landmark. The
Bonifacio Monument, imposing yet graceful,
thus manages to both serve as gateway and
landmark to the thousands that traverse
it, and yet fades into the scenery for those
who’ve seen it far too often for far too long.

For those who passionately argue that
Andres Bonifacio has suffered the double-
edged sword that is martyrdom-by-history,
the Bonifacio Monument likewise attests
to the drawback a prominent memorial

represents. The symbolism resonates: The
nominal hero of the masses, the plebeian
idealist, the revolutionary from Tondo,
standing still in the midst of the hustle and
bustle of the city — his gaze forever fixed on
the length of Avenida Rizal, the old road
leading back to Manila — indistinguishable
in the background, unmistakable yet obscure
in the pocket of Caloocan skyline that has
sprung up around it.

Today’s scenes are a far cry from the spectacle
that midwifed the Bonifacio Monument.
Eighty years ago, on the inauguration of
what was to become the grandest tribute
to Andres Bonifacio, the day was of pomp
and circumstance starkly befitting the
revolutionary from modest, plebeian Tondo.

Nominally created on October 23, 1933 by
virtue of Governor General Frank Murphy’s
Executive Order No. 452, the National
Executive Committee for the Inauguration of
the Andres Bonifacio Monument undertook
a ceremony steeped in Filipino symbolism
that would adorn every element of the
day’s activities: whether the parade, or the
unveiling, or the inauguration. Three women
were handpicked from schools to lead the
ceremonies as representations of Luzon
(from the Women’s College), Visayas (from
the Institute of Women), and Mindanao
(from the Centro Escolar de Senoritas/Center
for Women). The triumvirate would have
eight more women as attendants, themselves
hailing from, and effectively representing,
the eight provinces that led the revolution in
1896 — Manila, Cavite, Batangas, Bulacan,
Pampanga, Tarlac, Nueva Ecija, and Laguna.

As soon as the Speaker of the House Quintin
Paredes arrived for the inauguration of

the monument, the three women who
represented the three principal islands of
the archipelago came forward, accompanied
by members of the Katipunan. In 1933, this
meant three bent but proud men dressed in
their Katipunero best — Lieutenant Colonel
Venancio de Jesus, Captain Inocencio Peralta,
and Lieutenant Dionisio Buensuceso. The six
positioned themselves around the monument
to form a triangle. The women stepped
forward, escorted by designated members
of Congress, to unveil the monument to
the crowd that had gathered to witness this
tribute to Andres Bonifacio.

The Bonifacio Monument was both
valedictory of the Revolution of 1896
and pledge to future generations that
independence would one day be restored.
The unveiling of the monument itself was
the culmination of a decades-long movement
to commemorate not just the father of the
revolution, but to reassert the continuing
aspiration for independent nationhood of
the Filipinos.

The political context of the campaign
to build the monument is crucial to
understanding the identity of the monument
as both vindication and pledge. In 1901, the
Americans passed the Sedition Act (Act No.
292), prohibiting Filipinos from advocating
either independence or separation from
the United States. Ahead of permitting the
election of an all-Filipino lower house — the
Philippine Assembly, due to take office in
October 16, 1907 — the Americans noticed
that in the campaign for the election of
assemblymen, the Philippine flag came to be
prominently displayed: one such rally took
place in Caloocan, rich in memories of 1896.

Alarmed American associations passed a
resolution in August 23, 1907 — a month
redolent with memory for Filipinos —
demanding the proscription of the Filipino
flag. And so among the last acts of the
American-dominated Philippine Commission
was to ban the Philippine flag, anthem, and
symbols of the Katipunan and the First
Republic, on September 6, 1907.

Even if hemmed in by a thicket of legislation,
Filipinos kept pursuing independence: the
first efforts concentrating on symbolic
actions to assert that the aspiration for
nationhood had not dimmed. On June 19,
1908, Speaker Sergio Osmena formally
pledged the legislature to pursuing Philippine
independence. Assemblymen would pursue
legislation at home and abroad to secure a
pledge of independence, while reclaiming
the symbols of nationhood. And so even as
members of the legislature filed bill after bill
to legalize the Philippine flag, others — led
by a prominent veteran of the Katipunan,
Guillermo Masangkay — literally had a
representative forum in which to propose
that a monument be erected to Bonifacio’s
memory.

By 1911, a monument ( Grito de Balintawak),
with a generic Katipunero whose image
has come to be indelibly stamped in our
popular culture as the Supremo himself was
built in Caloocan (though it has since been
transferred to the front of Vinzons Hall, in UP
Diliman) not as a government-approved, or
funded, memorial, but as a private initiative.
Only a year later, in 1912, would the Rizal
Monument be unveiled. The question would
then shift to who would be honored in
only the second national monument to be
dedicated to a Filipino.

It would be Bonifacio and the effort would
be pursued in a methodical manner. On
February 5, 1915, the Philippine Assembly
passed Act No. 2494, which appropriated
funds for public works and monuments. In
August 29, 1916, the United States Congress
enacted the Jones Law, making Philippine
Independence a question of not if, but when —
and replacing the American-dominated
Philippine Commission with an all-Filipino
Senate, which was inaugurated in October of
that year. The coast was clear. On February
23, 1918, Act No. 2760 was passed, which
approved the building of a memorial to
Bonifacio, as well as the creation of national
committee to oversee it. A year and a half
later, the Philippine flag and the Philippine
National Anthem were finally legalized.

A decade spent in fierce clashes between
Filipino politicians and American Governors-
General would pass until, on the occasion of
Bonifacio’s 66th birth anniversary in 1929, at
5:45 p.m., the cornerstone of the monument
was ceremonially installed by Mrs. Aurora
Quezon, the wife of the highest-ranking
Filipino official at the time, Senate President
Manuel L. Quezon.

The national committee to build a monument
then launched a contest for the design and
the construction of the memorial. A total
of thirteen artists participated, submitting
their entries under aliases, and three notable
Filipino artists of the time were assembled to
judge over the results: the architect Andres
Luna de San Pedro (son of Juan Luna and the
city architect of Manila) as Chairman, along
with fellow architect Tomas Mapua (founder
of the Mapua Institute of Technology) and
the sculptor Vicente Francisco. By July 15,
1930, the contest calling for the design of

the monument had garnered thirteen entries,
which was then narrowed down to seven
by the 27th of July. Two days later, the
committee after further deliberation, had its
winners.

Second place went to “Pugad Lawin,” which
was later revealed to be a collaborative
entry of the architect Juan Nakpil (son of
Bonifacio’s second wife Gregoria de Jesus
and her second husband Julio Nakpil) and
the sculptor Ambrosio Garcia. Nakpil and
Garcia won a cash prize of P2,000; the
committee considered their design to be the
most original in incorporating the tenets of
modern art. Architect and historian Paolo
Alcazaren notes, “The entry submitted under
the name Pugad Lawin was a magnificent
trilon (three tall columns capped by a stylized
capital) in the Art Deco style. The figures at
the base were classical.”

The winning entry, which received a cash
prize of P3,000, went to “Batang Elias,”
the alias of Guillermo Tolentino. By then
Tolentino was, as Alcazaren notes, “already
an established sculptor, having come back
a few years before from extended studies in
sculpture in Washington D.C. and Rome.”
The committee deemed Tolentino’s design
to be in possession of all the necessary
requirements, artistic and sculptural — an
edificial equal to the greatness of the man
in whose honor the monument was to be
dedicated.

With the design on hand, the amount of
P97,000 (roughly P29,906,056.27 in today’s
money) was appropriated for the erection
of the monument — under Act No. 3602,
passed on December 2, 1929. On August 30,

1930, the committee announced the results
of the public competition pursuant to the
provisions of Act No. 3602. An additional
P26,041.76 (about P8, 028, 931. 53 in today’s
money) came from voluntary contributions
(Guillermo Masangkay, for one, had donated
P10,000). Guillermo Tolentino had, at his
disposal, the total amount of P125,000
(equivalent to about P38,538,732.39 today)
to construct the monument and thus realize
his vision for a bold, unprecedented, and
lasting tribute to Andres Bonifacio.

“The Bonifacio Monument,” Alcazaren
writes, “was intended to sit at its site
specifically to commemorate the historic spark
ignited there and that led to the culminating
events of 1898.” Moreover, the site was a
perfect counterpoint to the monument of
Rizal in Luneta: The two leading figures of
the Philippines’ emancipation from Spain
would bracket Manila — the national man of
letters down South by the sea, and the father
of the Philippine revolution up North — not
unlike sentries.

Caloocan used to be part of Tondo until 1815
when it became a municipality. The town’s
growth surged after the completion of the
Manila-Dagupan railway in 1892. It was there,
in August 23, 1896, that Andres Bonifacio led
the famous cry that sent the clear message
of resistance to Spanish rule. For several
years after, Caloocan was in the thick of the
fight; first against the Spanish, then quickly
against the Americans. By the turn of the
century, the terror of war turned into reluctant
acquiescence and Caloocan fell into the new
colonizer’s sphere of influence. [...] Manila
was slowly filling out and parts of the Daniel
Burnham master plan for the city was taking

shape. One of the main roads leading out of the
city was Rizal Avenue. The avenue's extension
was to link it with the highway leading north
(now known as the MacArthur Highway). A
junction was formed with these two and a
circumferential road known as Route 54 (now
EDSA). This junction gave the opportunity for
a rotunda and hence, a perfect setting for a
monument, an entry statement for the city
as well as an opportunity to commemorate
the heroes and the events that occurred in
Caloocan.

The rationale for the memorial’s location
would be just one of the many details honed
to capture the narrative of the Philippine
Revolution — and the very story of the
Philippines’ crusade for independence. From
conception to unveiling, the Bonifacio
Monument — an obelisk bearing 23 figures
cast in bronze, atop an octagonal base
with an eight-rayed sun; with a 45 -foot
tall pylon bearing the winged figure of
Victory; covering an area of 200sqm at
the time of its unveiling — would possess a
precise symbolism, every element envisioned
by Tolentino imbued with meaning. The
sculptor’s notes on his design described
it thusly: “The main component of the
monument is a 45-foot pylon topped by
the winged figure of Victory. At its base,
on a platform-like structure are the figures
underlining the various causes of the
Revolution. The pylon or obelisque (obelisk)
is composed of five parts corresponding to
the five aspects of the society, Kataastaasang,
Kagalang-Galangan na Katipunan ng mga
Anak ng Bayan (Highest and Most Venerable
Association of the Sons of the Nation). The
base is an octagon, the eight sides standing
for the first eight provinces to rise against

Spain, also represented as eight rays in the
Katipunan flag. The base rises in three steps,
each step alluding to each century of Spanish
rule.”

It is noteworthy to reflect that in contrast to
the ideological exclusivity of the past half-
century, the creator of the monument selected
by the generation of Filipinos who actually
lived through the tumultuous times of the
Propaganda Movement, the Revolution
of 1896, the First Republic, the Filipino-
American War and the peaceful campaign
to restore our independence, viewed the
monument and its symbols as informed by
Rizal.

The very pools of water that surround
the central obelisk were a nod to Rizal’s
comparison of the Filipino temper to
water — vital, its mien ever-changing, raging
when provoked, an “elemental force,”
which was among the motifs used in his El
Filibusterismo: “That water is very mild and
can be drunk, but that it drowns out the wine
and beer and puts out the fire, that heated
it becomes steam, and that ruffled it is the
ocean, that it once destroyed mankind and
made the earth tremble to its foundations!”

And so the pockets of water would serve as
a reminder of this elemental nature of the
Filipino; the sun with its eight rays was an
ever-loyal nod to the first eight provinces
that rose up against Spain; the bronze figures
were frozen in tableaux that embodied all
those sparks that would ultimately set afire
the long-suppressed yearning for liberty. The
very steps that led to the monument were
meant to allude to the centuries of Spanish
rule; every step, then, that one took toward

Bonifacio and all that he stood for was to
effectively rise against oppression by foreign
rule.

It was this precision in symbolism, the
keenness to imbue every element with weighty
meaning and allusion, was in keeping with
Tolentino’s training as a classical sculptor.
Guillermo Tolentino — who would become
a National Artist for Sculpture — was at the
time an established figure in the arts, having
been appointed a professor at the University
of the Philippines School of Fine Arts upon
his return from the the Royal Academy
of Fine Arts in Rome. Flis style, honed in
Europe, was of classical realism, and he
would remain a staunch and vocal champion
of the movement. (In the late 1930s, as
the classical style and modernism came to
a head, Tolentino memorably dismissed
modernist work as “ugly” — insisting that
“distortion in painting is a cardinal sin.” It
is a curious counterpoint, as the second prize
for the design of the Bonifacio Monument,
submitted by Nakpil and Garcia, was
predominantly in the modernist style.)

Tolentino’s aesthetic would influence
numerous Filipino sculptors, many of them
having studied under him at the UP School
of Fine Arts. One of these students was
Anastacio Caedo, his star pupil, assistant,
and protege. Caedo would be Tolentino’s
right-hand man in the creation of the
Bonifacio Monument, the two leading a team
of sculptors that toiled in a studio garden in
Malate. The Bonifacio Monument was thus,
expectedly, a collaborative effort that sought
to realize Tolentino’s singular vision: The
construction of the central column, including
the base, was done by the architect Andres

Luna de San Pedro (son of the ilustrado hero
Juan Luna, and the chairman of the jurors
that chose Tolentino’s design); the pedestal
and shaft were carved in granite imported
from Germany. The sculptor Francesco
Riccardo Monti, Italian by birth, would
likewise lend his expertise in the forging
of the 23 bronze figures (cast in Italy) that
served as the memorial’s central element.
(Monti, too, would provide a postwar link,
in terms of monuments: Monti designed the
mourning angels that surmount the Quezon
Monument — itself designed by Federico
Ilustre, who started his career as a draftsman
for Juan Nakpil.)

If the tableaux in the Rizal monument are
static and sparse, those in the Bonifacio
Monument are imbued with energy and
emotion. Each figure is modeled with classical
perfection in composition, but charged with
the fierce sentiments of a romanticist —
and all of them fashioned with a realist’s
careful and conscientious attention to detail.
Emilio Jacinto’s face is frozen in a battle-
cry right behind Bonifacio; on the other
side of the obelisk are the priests Mariano
Gomez, Jose Apolonio Burgos, and Jacinto
Zamora. Caedo would serve as a model
of one of the Katipuneros — the one that
cradled a dead infant, with a sheet thrown
over its still face. (Caedo, too, is among
those considered to be the model for the UP
Oblation, as he was Tolentino’s assistant
during its creation.) Tolentino also modelled
after Mrs. Angela Sison (wife of Senator, and
later Defense Secretary, Teofilo Sison) the
young woman that lay prostrate before an
angry old man; Guillermo Masangkay’s role
in the revolution and the realization of this
monument to its nominal father would be

forever immortalized as a Katipunero tearing
up a cedula.

Nearly unseen unless from a considerable
distance from the monument, the winged
figure of Victory rises 45 feet in the air, the
granite tower her pedestal. Patterned after
the Winged Victory of Samothrace, the
triumph it evokes only underscores the value
of the tumult and the struggle and the fury
that holds her up. That in the centuries of
subjugation, for every mother who had held
her dead child, every laborer who defiantly
tore proof of Spain’s ownership, for every
boy from Tondo who dared form a nation —
the goddess of Victory looked on. We had
won.

Nothing demonstrates this — the claiming
of the Monument and the Hero for a
nation once more on the threshold of
independence — better than the marker at
the foot of Bonifacio’s statue: cast in the
same enduring bronze, but in the various
codes of the Katipunan, with exhortations
not in English or Spanish, but the Tagalog
wielded by Bonifacio as every bit as powerful
a weapon as the bolos, rifles, and handguns
of the Katipuneros. Literally a codex — it is
a proclamation, enduring, inscrutable except
to those to whom the words were originally
addressed: the Filipinos. Decoded, it is
Bonifacio’s proclamation of August 28th,
two days before he led the attack at San
Juan del Monte — the first real battle of the
Philippine revolution:

Mga maginoong namiminuno, kasapi at mga
kapatid: Sa inyong lahat ipinatutungkol ang
pahayag na ito. Totoong kinakailangan na sa
lalong madaling panahon ay putulin natin ang

walang pangalang pang-lulupig na ginagawa
sa mga anak ng bayan, na ngayo’y nagtitiis
ng mabibigat na parusa at pahirap sa mga
bilangguan. Na sa dahilang ito’y mangyaring
ipa-tanto ninyo sa lahat ng mga kapatid na
sa araw ng sabado, ika-29 ng kasalukuyan,
ay puputok ang panghihimagsik na
pinagkasunduan natin, kaya’t kinakailangang
sabaysabay na kumilos ang mga bayanbayan
at sabaysabay na salakayin ang maynila. Ang
sino pa mang humadlang sa banal na adhikang
ito ng bayan ay ipalalagay na taksil at kalaban
maliban na nga lamang kung may sakit na
dinaramdam o ang katawa’y may sama at
sila’y paguusigin alinsunod sa palatuntunang
ating pinaiiral. — Bundok ng Kalaayan, ika-28
ng Agosto ng 1896, May Pagasa. :

[ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY TEODORO A.

AGONCILLO AND S.V. EPISTOLA:]

Bonifacio’s Proclamation of August 28, 1896:
This manifesto is for all of you: It is absolutely
necessary for us to stop at the earliest
possible time the nameless oppressions being
perpetrated on the sons of the country who
are now suffering the brutal punishment and
tortures in jails, and because of this please
let all the brethren know that on Saturday,
the 29th of the current month, the revolution
shall commence according to our agreement.
For this purpose it is necessary for all towns
to rise simultaneously and attack Manila at
the same time. Anybody who obstructs this
sacred ideal of the people will be considered a
traitor and an enemy, except if he is ill or is not
physically fit, in which case he shall be tried
according to the regulations we have put in
force. — Mount of Liberty, 28th August 1896,
Andres Bonifacio.

Whether in word or deed, all this was thus
anchored on Andres Bonifacio — in the midst
the tumult of these tableaux portraying
the agonizing struggle for Philippine
independence was a Bonifacio standing tall
and serene, his gaze cast toward Old Manila.
The Bonifacio of Tolentino was imbued with
classical meaning, expressing almost no
emotion — a cool, calculating, stoical leader
in the thick of battle. Not deaf to the horrors
and rage that surrounded him, but drawing
strength from it all, held in a calm center.
Napoleon Abueva, a student of Tolentino,
offers an alternative interpretation: that
Bonifacio’s quiet dignity and confidence
evokes the resilient spirit of Filipinos.

And so here, at what was once the entrance
to Manila before the era of the expressway,
stands a calm Bonifacio, dressed in an
embroidered Barong Tagalog and knotted
kerchief, with a bolo in one hand, a revolver
in the other, surrounded by Jacinto and
two other Katipuneros, symbolizing the
Cry of Pugad Lawin. Tolentino’s work on
Bonifacio was the culmination of extensive
research and consultations not just with
Bonifacio’s living contemporaries, but
also with the occult through seances and
espiritistas; Tolentino modelled the figure’s
bone structure after Bonifacio’s surviving
younger sister Espiridiona. Tolentino’s sacred
classical realist aesthetic has, perhaps, given
us a Bonifacio so unlike the volatile man
of action that has bled into our collective
psyche — but was nonetheless the best
approximation of the man so few could ever
define so accurately.

Tolentino’s exertions to portray Bonifacio in
a manner that would satisfy his dwindling

number of contemporaries yet immortalize
the appearance of the Supremo for posterity,
speaks volumes of the KKK as Secret
Society — in comparison to the First Republic
that would succeed it, which managed to
immortalize for all time, the features of
its protagonists in photographs every bit
as poised — and posed — as those of the
Propagandists. This telling detail — or to be
precise, the lack of them, much as Tolentino
was prepared to point to documents and
testimony assiduously collected by himself —
says everything that needed to be said, then
or now, about how daring, and essentially,
successful the Supremo was as organizer.
And how sweeping, because so sudden, the
tumult of revolution was, that both its leader
and its followers would rise, and fall, with
the scantiest of documentation, written or
visual.

The biographies of the man who would
found the Katipunan trace his 33 years in a
short, terse, faithful rote: A man of humble
beginnings who wanted more from life — this,
unfortunately, in a rigid society that frowned
upon such audacious ambition (how we
forget the rejection he faced from the family
of his second wife, or the protestations against
revolution of his own scandalized brother-in-
law). The story follows in telegraphic detail:
Bonifacio the hard worker who wished to
rise up the ranks; self-taught, with a desire to
be a great thinker, to be ilustrado in spirit —
he read the great French novels, we learned;
admired Rizal; and would himself pen stirring
manifestos and rousing nationalist poetry.
More importantly, we are told, his ambition
did not end with himself. Disgruntled by the
status quo — of the seeming futility of simply
desiring more under Spanish rule, with its

insistence on class divides and the superiority
of the foreign race — Bonifacio formed and
led the Katipunan, a secret society whose
sole aim was to overthrow three centuries of
subjugation to Spain.

The Katipunan, for Bonifacio, was
something that the country direly needed;
for the Katipunan was action. It was to be
more than the stirrings of dissatisfaction,
more than mere grumbling; it was more than
mere response, more than the willingness to
risk life and limb because of the cause. The
Katipunan was committing one’s self fully to
the cause. For Bonifacio, the Katipunan was
going to do something that would liberate
the people, proudly reclaim what was truly
ours, and — consciously for its founder or
otherwise — in the process build a nation
independent in thought, word, and deed.

Our history books catalogued the doings
of this Bonifacio spurred into action —
as do countless historical markers, and
monuments cradled in town centers, as do
the postcards every grade school student
is required to include in a scrapbook of
Philippine history. The President of the
Supreme Council at the head of a defiant
crowd in the then-wilderness of Caloocan (of
whose composition we can forever catch a
glimpse through the testimony of Guillermo
Masangkay), leading the tearing of the
sacred cedula — the diminutive piece of paper
that proved that one was a subject of Spain.
And then here we have Bonifacio with his
bolo thrust forward — what could be nobler
than a revolution equipped with nothing
more than crude blades and the frenzied
thirst for freedom? — leading the charge.
Here, too, is the Bonifacio painted vividly,

even luridly, in the national memory: The red
pantaloons of the Katipunan gleaming in the
night skirmishes, the indio face scorned by
the conquerors forever frozen in the battle-
cry for liberty. Our collective memory has
successfully immortalized this boy from
Tondo: Bonifacio the noble, Bonifacio the
indignant, Bonifacio the defiant: Bonifacio,
ever the proud “Pangulo Ng Haring-Bayang
Katagalugan,” even in his final days, toppled
from power, scorned by his own compatriots.
The Bonifacio Monument sought to capture
all that — and it was built, it must be said, as
much as an act of posthumous vindication,
even rehabilitation, as it was intended to be
a symbolic place of interment for a Supremo
whose mortal remains were lost to history:
for it, too, fulfills the role of a particular
memorial, the symbolic last resting place for
one whose bones are lost to posterity.

Monuments are meant to capture a
greatness precisely because they are forged
to stand in defiance of the passage of time,
of the reputations assigned by trends in
historiography, and of the caprices of popular
fashion. From the late 1990s onward, the
government of Caloocan City would paint
the eight-rayed sun a deep yellow, and the
octagonal base that surrounded it a red-
brown meant to simulate brick. The punch of
color would only underscore the stateliness
of the granite and bronze that lay at its
heart. Numerous attempts have been made
to alter the dimensions of or entirely move
the monument — to Fort Bonifacio, to Luneta
close to Rizal’s own memorial (where, in
the twilight of his life, Emilio Aguinaldo
dreamed his own monument would stand),
to the northern district of Caloocan. These
numerous proposals have been rejected —

in preservation of historical importance, of
national art, of the wholeness of Tolentino’s
aesthetic and nationalist vision; of what the
historian Simon Schama terms “landscape
and memory.”

It is Guillermo Tolentino’s memorial — rich in
symbolism, imbued, not with false gravitas,
but rather, the vital energy, emotions, and
losses that are the landmarks in the long
road to Philippine independence; enduringly,
and thus, relentlessly, so representative of the
Filipino people and its hopes and its dreams
and its sufferings and what makes it whole —
that has perhaps served Bonifacio’s legacy
best. It stands at the heart of Caloocan today,
eighty years from its unveiling — crowded
from all sides by artless establishments that
proclaim their transient commercialism,
pedestrians who view the bronze and granite
ode and testament to the Filipino spirit as
nothing more than scenery. But it will endure,
the winged figure of Victory will forever
gaze from her pedestal assuring us of our
hard-won liberty as she surmounts the eight
provinces first proudly proclaimed in the
Katipunan flag and commemorated in our
national flag born of the resumed revolution
in 1898 — and Bonifacio will stand tall and
proud and defiant in a world that has refused
to stay still, as a reminder that passion must
be born of reason; and that action must have,
at its heart, a moral purpose: the ultimate
source of an individual’s — and a people’s —
ability to achieve a happy, cohesive, and
independent existence.

BIBILIOGRAPHY

Agoncillo, Teodoro. The Revolt of the
Masses. Quezon City: University of the
Philippines, 1956.

Alcazaren, Paulo. “Wait a Monument.”
Philippine Star, March 9, 2002, http://www.
philstar.com/modern-living/153242/wait-
monument/.

Chua, Michael Charleston. “Shouting
in Bronze: The Lasting Relevance of
Andres Bonifacio and His Monument in
Caloocan.” Artes de las Filipinas, http://
www.artesdelasfilipinas.com/archives/52/
shouting-in-bronze-the-lasting-relevance-
of-andres-bonifacio-and-his-monument-in-
caloocan.

Programa de la Inangnracion del Monumento
de Andres Bonifacio.

Richardson, Jim. “Katipunan: Documents
and Studies.” Katipunan: Documents and
Studies, http://www.kasaysayan-kkk.info/.

May, Glenn Anthony. Inventing A Hero: The
Posthumous Re-creation of Andres Bonifacio.
Quezon City: New Day Publishers, 1997.

Melendez, Christian Bernard A. “A Moment
for the Monument.” National Historical
Commission of the Philippines, accessed
March 22, 2013. http://nhcp.gov.ph/a-

moment-for-the-monument/.

Ocampo, Ambeth R. Bonifacio’s Bolo.
Manila: Anvil Publishing Inc., 1995.
Tolentino, Guillermo E. Facing History. Pasig
City: Kalipunan ng Sining at Kultura ng
Pasig, Inc., 2003.

Tiongson, Nicanor G., CCP Encyclopedia
of Philippine Art: Philippine Visual Arts.
Manila: Cultural Center of the Philippines,
1994.

of the Rizal Monument

MANUEL L. QUEZON Ml AND SASHA MARTINEZ

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines website to commemorate
the Centenary of the Rizal Monument,
December 30, 2013]

December 30, 2013 marked the centennial of
the Rizal Monument, which was built as the
tomb and memorial to Jose P. Rizal and has
since then served as the de facto symbol of our
nationhood. The following essay on the Rizal
Monument — on its origins, complex history,
and enduring legacy — is the Presidential
Museum and Library’s contribution to the
Rizal Day 2013 commemoration.

I. LANDMARKS OF EXCLUSION

Intramuros, by its very design, was meant
to exclude. Conforming to the shape of the
river and the sea-edge that surrounded it,
the walls of Manila — walls that had been
built as fortification against foreign invasion
and native rebellion — served as a sixty-six
hectare reliquary of medieval dreams.

At its historic core was Fort Santiago — the

old palisaded settlement of Maynilad, turned
into the Fort of St. James, named after the
patron saint of the conquista of Castille,
Leon, and Aragon invoked by the Catholic
Monarchs as they wrested away the Iberian
Peninsula from the Moors. Intramuros had
heavily guarded gates, drawbridges over a
surrounding moat; it had bastions for long-
range offense, lunettes to divide and impede
attackers, redoubts to serve as safehouses
for retreating defensive soldiers. The enclave
that served as the seat of the Spanish colonial
government and the Spanish religious
authority in the region had been built as a
military fort, for it cradled that which Spain
valued most in the colony. Writing a few
years (1859-1860) before Jose Rizal’s birth,
a German named Feodor Jagor described
Intramuros as “built more for security than
for beauty,” where life was “vanity, envy,
empleomania and racial strife.” Intramuros
was, foremost, for the Cross and the Sword.

Halfway around the world from the
Continent, the peninsulares of the Philippine
archipelago served as loyally Mother Spain’s
thrust of cross-and-sword — although at

the cost of having to live by the bells of
forced resettlement that tolled, for the past
two centuries, to keep medieval time and
obedience in a colony that was modernizing
almost against its conquerors’ will. Vanity,
all is vanity: In its exhaustion and decadence,
the rituals of religion were mirrored in the
ritual life of the colony, every bit as rigid and
status-obsessed as the creaky Bourbon court
in Madrid. As with every spanning wall,
those of Intramuros contained just as well as
they kept out.

The foreshadowing of the end came in the
late 1700s — shortly after the British fairly
easily conquered of Manila, and marking
the momentum of history shifting from
Spanish conquest to defense and decline —
for the more affluent of the population of
Intramuros to wander beyond its walls.
Within the Intramuros, perhaps, they would
forever be subjects of Spain; beyond it, they
could lay claim to the glamour of being the
elite in a land largely oppressed. As a result
of this mild exodus, suburban culture began
thriving in Manila, especially in the stretch of
seafront land connecting the Walled City to
the suburbs that surrounded it. As the authors
of Malacanan Palace: The Official Illustrated
History note, “Seventeenth century colonial
life placed a high value on being able to get
away to the outskirts — whether along the
waterways of the Pasig or by the shores of
Manila Bay in such places as near as Ermita,
Malate, and Pineda (Pasay).”

This area we know today as Rizal Park, that
which began as barely habitable marshland,
then became a hub of the Spanish leisure
class. The soft ground and the esteros were
filled to create a uniform field that stretched

PHOTO: National Hero Dr. Jose Rizal, whose death
we commemorate on December 30. This photo
is part of the Colorized History project of the
Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO).

from the Walled City to surrounding
arrabals or suburbs — particularly to Ermita,
originally christened Bagumbayan or the
“new village.” The field’s proximity to the
seat of power, its ease of access from the new
country homes being built in the outskirts of
Manila, and the breeze it drew from the sea a
welcome respite from the tropical heat made
it an ideal spot for the elite insistent of their
comforts.

The promenade became part of the daily
agenda, although one that would always
concede to that set by the Catholic church’s.
After vespers, the Manila elite would
converge on the rectangular field, for the
bracing evening air and the pleasure of each
other’s company. The seemingly innocuous
stroll allowed the Spanish their early evening
relaxation — all whilst preening before people

of their own class and race (and, later, when
less stringent rules applied, to the ilustrados
who streamed from the surrounding
suburbs). It was a ritual of posturing beneath
the guise of a leisurely, even lazy, pursuit.

In adherence, the marshland was to be
manipulated into a map of paseos (walkways)
and calzadas (carriage drives) over time; it
would eventually contain a rotunda at its
heart and two circular fountains, as well as a
bandstand. The Governor-General’s military
band would play once or twice a week, on
which occasions, British author Henry T.
Ellis would write, “ caballeros may be seen
lounging amongst the carriages that have
halted near the music, talking soft nonsense
and whispering naughty fibs to the senoritas,
their bewitching occupants, braving alike the
brilliant fire of their dark, lustrous eyes and
the all-enchanting coquetries of the fan, in
the mysterious uses of which no ladies in the
world are better versed than the daughters of
Spain and her colonies.”

[By the 18th century] the daily paseo would
become a display of wealth and power. Henry
T. Ellis, a British author who served in the Royal
Navy, visited Manila in 1856 and later wrote a
book on his travels, Hong Kong to Manilla and
the Lakes of Luzon. In it, he described Manila
and the Calzada: “The town, on the southern
side of the river, or what may be called Manila
proper, is the old city, first established by the
Spaniards. It is surrounded by a wall and ditch,
with drawbridges, sally-ports, and gates, and
may deserve the rank as a third-class fortress
of its time. Things here, speaking generally,
are kept in a very creditable state of repair,
and the gates, or most of them, jealously
closed at certain hours. Two-thirds of the way

around the walls, there is a fine broad carriage
drive, called the Calzada, where all the beauty
and fashions of both sides of the water enjoy
the sea-breeze, which sets in pretty regularly
between four and five. Here may be seen in the
evenings as many as a hundred, for the most
part, elegant carriages, graced by Spanish and
mestiza ladies, with hardly a bonnet amongst
them, and having no covering for their heads
save their own luxuriant jetty locks, dressed
and ornamented with great taste.”

The Malecon [the waterside edge of the open
field between Intramuros and Ermita] and the
Calzada would merge by the edge of Ermita,
which also allowed promenaders from Ermita
and Malate to join the evening throng. The
three streams of traffic meeting at the open
field naturally required some organization for
the people in each stream to head back to
their origins. This made way for the creation
of a flattened roundabout, or as described
in another travelogue, a small extended
hippodrome. The roundabout or loop formed
another paseo and a space or plaza. This
space was given a formal name, the Paseo
de Alfonso XIII, but it became more popularly
known as the Paseo de Luneta or the Luneta
for short.

[From Parks for a Nation: The Rizal Park and
50 Years of the National Parks Development
Committee (NPDC), published by the NPDC.]

The Luneta, then, draws its name from the
lunette or the “crescent-shaped structure
for defense used in fortifications in the
17th to 18th centuries” — a persistent, if
now forgotten, reminder of the military
fortifications of the conqueror’s citadel it is
adjacent to.

The more illustrious Filipinos of the
time were given leave to join these daily
promenades — if only because of the access
from the surrounding suburbs they’d been
earlier permitted to reside in. But despite these
occasional brushes in this half-kilometer field
fronting the sea, a yawning chasm of class,
politics, and subjugation remained between
the Filipinos and their Spanish conquerors. It
was, of course, an institutionalized, nearing-
inherent division — one that had been in place
for more than three hundred years. It was not
equality to walk the same manicured lawn as
the frocked granddaughters of conquerors;
the caste would not be broken down because
an archbishop’s carriage was mere paces
away — but the shared proximity lent to the
illusion. This ease of colonial living that the
Spaniards enjoyed — which, although aspired
for and even shared by sympathizers and
select ilustrados, nonetheless exacerbated
the servitude and suffering of the common
Filipino — would be disrupted by the onset of
the Philippine revolution.

The century that had passed allowed the
peninsulares and insulares to settle into
their life of colonial relative luxury — but
as pockets of rebellion erupted all over the
country, and the city of Manila itself was
threatened by skirmishes led by one Andres
Bonifacio, the plebeian from modest Tondo
(and, thus, an alarmingly apt poster boy for
indio insurrection), the conquerors were
pushed to slowly dispossess themselves of
the casual enjoyment of the affluence of
awarded their station. The changes wrought
to the Luneta best encapsulated this. Once
the Filipinos began banding together to
overthrow Spanish rule, there came the
transformation of a setting that invited

leisure — one that indulged, for a handful of
hours every day, the illusion that the Filipino
and the Spanish who performed their nightly
promenade were equal in stature — into
a chilling bulwark of the three-centuries-
strong foreign regime, hosting the cruelties it
stood for and espoused.

The Paseo de Luneta would become the
capital’s killing field, but its dual role only
conformed to the Spaniard aim. As the
National Parks Development Committee
points out, “Bagumbayan Park gracefully
hosted flirtations among the Manila elite,
as well as callously witnessed the deaths
of the disloyal citizenry.” Because beneath
the trappings of relative colonial comfort,
of preening in the late afternoons, and the
joyful gatherings of the cool evenings,
Mother Spain’s dictum held ever-strong:
Indios were forever indios, and woe to those
who rebelled.

II. TROPICAL BAROQUE

In the last decades of its reign, the Intramuros
was subject to a series of events that lends
to the portentousness of its narrative — part
and parcel of the defeat of Spanish colonial
rule. On the eve of the Revolution, Tropical
Baroque was Spanish Manila; Andre
Bellessort, writing in 1897, described the
febrile portents of the end of dominion:

In addition, news reports and slogans that
virtually spread by themselves assume the
forms of legend in this country. Before the
insurrection, it was rumored in Tondo that
around six in the evening people would see
the apparition of a woman whose head was
crowned by serpents; everyone interpreted

this vision to mean that the fatal hour was
approaching. Another report had it that
in Biak-na-bato a woman had given birth
to a child dressed in a general’s uniform —
which meant that arms had been landed.
These tales and apparitions over-excite the
people’s imagination, which soon drops the
supposedly hidden meaning and gets lost
in pure fantasy. Someone has written that
the Spanish conquest robbed the subdued
peoples of their original poetic imagination
and impoverished their souls. A time always
comes when the spirit of a race is reborn
and impatiently seeks to know life. The very
earth nourishes it with fresh vigor. Today the
Spaniards have not only peoples to contend
with but also, and above all, the phantoms
of the past, nature awakened from slumber,
legends descending from the mountains, the
dead rising from their graves. And that is why
the soldier, overwhelmed by his task, fights
indifferently while the insurgents go into
battle with such courage that they actually
have been observed, rushing, bolo in hand,
across firing lines and returning to camp
bloody but alive.

[One Week in the Philippines by Andre
Bellessort (November 1897), translated by E.
Aguilar Cruz.]

PHOTO: This urn contains the remains of Jose
Rizal. Photo courtesy of National Historical
Commission of the Philippines.

But the disruptions to the Spanish regime had
a root in the disruptions to the very landscape
they’d unfurled their colonial empire on. In
1863, the year of Andres Bonifacio’s birth, a
great earthquake toppled the Cathedral and
many other churches, and the Palace of the
Governor General in Intramuros, causing the
Governors General to “temporarily” reside
in Malacanan Palace (until, in the twilight
of their rule, they would once more return
to Intramuros). The rebuilding of the city
would mark, as Nick Joaquin described it,
the incarnation of “the Manila of Rizal and
the Revolution, the last great creation of
Spain in the Philippines.”

Integral to this final incarnation of Spain was
Bagumbayan, where an execution provided
the birth of a consciousness that was patently
national: of the Filipino not as Spaniard
born overseas, but former Indio claiming
nationhood.

Bagumbayan was the site of the martyrdom
of three secular priests falsely accused
of leading an uprising. On January 20,
1872, two hundred Filipinos employed at
the Cavite arsenal staged a revolt against
the Spanish government’s voiding of their
exemption from the payment of tributes.
The Cavite Mutiny led to the persecution of
several prominent Filipinos; secular priests
Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto
Zamora — who would then be collectively
named GomBurZa — were tagged as the
masterminds of the uprising. They were
charged with treason and sedition by the
Spanish military tribunal — believed to be
part of a conspiracy to stifle the growing
popularity of Filipino secular priests and
the threat they posed to the Spanish clergy.

The GomBurZa were publicly executed, by
garrote, on the early morning of February
17, 1872 at Bagumbayan, the hub of the
leisure class.

The Archbishop of Manila refused to
defrock them, and ordered the bells of every
church to toll in honor of their deaths; the
Sword, in this instance, denied the moral
justification of the Cross. The martyrdom
of the three secular priests would resonate
among Filipinos; grief and outrage over
their execution would make way for the
first stirrings of the Filipino revolution, thus
making the first secular martyrs of a nascent
national identity. Jose Rizal would dedicate
his second novel, El Filibusterismo, to the
memory of GomBurZa, to what they stood
for, and to the symbolic weight their deaths
would henceforth hold:

But there came rebirth, after death: The reign
of the Cross and the Sword came to an end
where it began: in Fort Santiago where, in a
cell, the Spanish authorities imprisoned the
man whose life had proposed the inclusion
spelled the death-knell of Castilian rule.

The most bravo of the indios — the “Tagalog
Christ,” in the immortal lines of the Basque
intellectual Miguel de Unamuno — was
executed by musketry in Bagumbayan, on
December 30, 1896, for sedition and for
inciting an uprising: Jose P. Rizal — scholar
and writer, practicing ophthalmologist,
celebrated ilustrado, and he who would be
designated as the Philippines’ national hero.

Eyewitnesses — Danilo Dolor recently

compiled the catalog of first person accounts
of Rizal’s final moments — all marveled

The Government, by enshrouding your trial in
mystery and pardoning your co-accused, has
suggested that some mistake was committed
when your fate was decided; and the whole
of the Philippines, in paying homage to your
memory and calling you martyrs, totally
rejects your guilt. The Church, by refusing
to degrade you, has put in doubt the crime
charged against you.

As Leon Ma. Guerrero astutely notes in his
celebrated biography of the Filipino nationalist,
The First Filipino, “Our story begins with an
execution which prefigures its end.” It would
be nearly fourteen years after the portentous
garroting of the GomBurZa that Rizal would
meet his own death at the hands of the Spanish
government — stemming from similarly flimsy
accusations, the same mystery-enshrouded trial,
and in the same seaside field.

at his composure, instantly, it seems,
identifying it as a secular crucifixion. Rafael
Palma described it as a combination of the
sacred and profane: “A shot rang out and
something like an immense sigh arose from
the multitude, indicating that all was over.
[...] Shouts of ‘Long Live Spain! Death to
the Traitors!’ could be heard three or four
times. People began to disperse and to leave
the place, contented and happy at satisfying
their curiosity. I even saw some Filipinos
laughing;” a British writer compared declared
the execution “one of the most cold blooded
crimes registered in history since the tragedy
of Golgotha”; and last words attributed
to Rizal at the moment the rifles fired:
“Consummatum est.” It is finished. Biblical,
indeed.

To Rizal’s contemporaries, molded, after all,
by Rizal’s vision that the indio was Filipino,
the trial and execution of Rizal was thus the
ultimate transfiguration. Flere is Apolinario
Mabini, summarizing its meaning in his book,
La Revolution Filipina :

In contrast to [Fr.] Burgos who wept because
he died guiltless, Rizal went to the execution
ground calm and even cheerful, to show that
he was happy to sacrifice his life, which he
had dedicated to the good of all the Filipinos,
confident that in love and gratitude they
would always remember him and follow his
example and teaching. In truth the merit of
Rizal’s sacrifice consists precisely in that it
was voluntary and conscious. He had known
perfectly well that, if he denounced the
abuses which the Spaniards were committing
in the Philippines, they would not sleep in
peace until they had encompassed his ruin;
yet he did so because, if the abuses were not

exposed, they would never be remedied. From
the day Rizal understood the misfortunes of
his native land and decided to work to redress
them, his vivid imagination never ceased to
picture to him at every moment of his life the
terrors of the death that awaited him; thus he
learned not to fear it, and had no fear when it
came to take him away; the life of Rizal, from
the time he dedicated it to the service of his
native land, was therefore a continuing death,
bravely endured until the end for love of his
countrymen.

But just as Rizal firmly situated his own
execution with that of GomBurZa, it in turn
— considering how it stands, especially, in the
narrative of the Philippines’ emancipation
from Spain — was but one of many in
Bagumbayan, which had, for seventy-four
years in total, served as execution site for
insurrectos, Filipino rebels and mutineers that
paved the way to lasting independence.

The National Parks Development Committee
(NPDC) notes, in their Parks for a Nation,
“The actual number of people executed at
the Luneta remains unknown. According
to the National Flistorical Commission of
the Philippines, there were some 880 people
martyred at the old Bagumbayan. One of the
earliest recorded incidents was the capture
and execution of 82 non-commissioned
officers and soldiers of the Tayabas regiment,
headed by Sergeant Irineo Samaniego, on
January 21, 1843. Samaniego and his men
launched an uprising in retaliation to the
killings by the Spanish army of hundreds of
old men, women, and children in Alitao on
November 1, 1841.”

Seventy-three members of the Katipunan

were executed in Bagumbayan; black granite
tablets bearing the names of identified
members now line the pathway in modern-
day Rizal Park’s Heroes’ Square. Four months
before Rizal’s execution by musketry — on
August 31, 1896, two days after Bonifacio
issued a manifesto declaring the start of the
revolt against Spain — fifty-seven Filipino
revolutionaries were shot in Bagumbayan.
Five days after this, four more Katipuneros
were captured and executed at the same site.

Rizal’s execution would be far from the last
the site would host, despite the furor it had
sparked from Filipinos already roused by
the movements of the Katipunan: Five days
after Rizal’s martyrdom, on January 4, 1987,
eleven people — most of them Freemasons —
were killed by firing squad. They were the
ilustrados of Nueva Caceres (now Naga) — a
city currently in Camarines Sur. A week later,
another thirteen — immortalized as Trece
Martires in both memory and the place-name
of their home town — would be martyred at
Bagumbayan.

The Spaniards exulting in the Luneta would
soon enough make their final retreat to
Intramuros; for the second — and now, last —
time, it would face an assault from another
Western power; the instrument of defeat
would be signed in San Agustin, burial place
of Legazpi and oldest of the churches in the
city: sword, after three centuries, surrendered
in a convent consecrated to the cross.

III. INDIO BRAVO

In the seventeen years after Rizal’s execution,
authorities both Filipino and American — the
new, more “benevolent” conquerors — would

legislate the martyrdom of Rizal, culminating
in the construction of a monument in
his honor. It is this formalistically simple
memorial — albeit an elaborate final resting
place of his nearing-sacred remains — that
has become the de facto symbol of our
nationhood: a bronze and granite homage
to a man’s martyrdom, built at the very field
where he met his untimely death. And this
monument — and the extravagant rallying
for the memory of Rizal, almost immediately
after Spain surrendered to the United States
of America its colonial possession — was but
one of many of the Americans’ politically
strategic moves in their occupation of the
Philippines.

But even before all the legislation that, by
whatever agenda, pushed forward Rizal as
the nation’s foremost hero; even before Rizal’s
execution at daybreak of December 30,
1896 — the Filipino revolutionaries looked
to Rizal as their hero, his principles were
adopted, if translated, in the Katipunan’s
crusade for Philippine independence. Because
even if Rizal himself disavowed the revolution
as Andres Bonifacio and Emilio Aguinaldo
envisioned it, sharing with Rizal the dream
of true independence — of nationhood — was
part of the spirit that spurred the revolution.
The Katipunan famously inducted its
members under a portrait of Rizal; Bonifacio
himself invoked that supreme “phantom of
the past,” Rizal. His manifesto of March
1897 invoked:

Sasagi kaya sa inyong loob ang panlolomo
at aabutin ang panghihinayang na mamatay
sa kadahilanang ito? Hindi, hindi! Sapagka’t
nakikintal sa inyong gunita yaang libolibong
kinitil na buhay ng mapanganyayang kamay

ng kastila, yaong daing, yaong himutoc
at pananangis ng mga pinapangulila ng
kanilang kalupitan, yaong mga kapatid nating
nangapipiit sa kalagimlagim na bilanguan
at nagtiis ng walang awang pagpapahirap,
yaong walang tilang pag agos ng luha ng
mga nawalay sa piling ng kanilang mga
anac, asawa at matatandang magulang na
itinapon sa iba’t ibang malalayong lupa at
ang katampalasanang pagpatay sa ating
pinakaiibig na kababayan na si M. Jose Rizal,
ay nagbukas sa ating puso ng isang sugat na
kailan pa ma’y di mababahaw.

Interesting is the use of “Maginoo” —
highest of the high, in the prehispanic
“perdido eden” of Rizal and Bonifacio in
their writings; for “Maginoo” in our ancient
societies subsumed all other exalted ranks,
whether Rajah or Datu; higher, even that of
the posthumous honorific, now current, of
“Gat,” applied to both Rizal and Bonifacio —
interesting, because though conferred by his
contemporaries, it failed to gain currency in
their posterity.

Ironic, too, was that in his death, Rizal
fully embodied the de Unamuno moniker
of “Tagalog Christ” (though also “Tagalog
Hamlet”). For Rizal the Deist and critic of
Catholic ritual became a secular martyr,
glittering with the trappings of sainthood,
imbued with the iconography of The
Redeemer. Among the most iconic Rizaliana
photographs was Rizal’s own mother Teodora
Alonzo posting with her son’s bones. After
the Rizal family was given leave to retrieve
his remains from Paco Cemetery, Alonzo
cleaned the bones herself, and wrapped them
in a fine linen cloth not unlike a shroud. At
Fort Santiago, a splintered piece of spine —

remains on display in gilded and crystal-
protected splendor, a kind of monstrance of
the cult of nationhood.

Thus whether in the trappings of
Catholicism’s veneration of the saints, or
transmogrified into Brown Christ, Filipinos
were inclined — thought it only right — to
give Rizal the honor that he was due. Where
folk religion was, the First Republic in its
quest to achieve an identity would in turn
decree worthy veneration: On December 20,
1898, Aguinaldo issued an edict designating
December 30 of every year as a “National
Day of Mourning for Rizal and other victims
of the Spanish government, throughout
its three centuries of oppressive rule.” Ten
days later, Filipinos as citizens of a nation
commemorated Rizal Day for the first time.

All things considered, the Americans’
iconization of Rizal can be seen as a convenient
move for the Filipinos who had pushed for
the same aims. Though the motivations may
differ — and Renato Constantino’s argument
against the Americans’ agenda may ring
true — in the end, both desired the same
widespread and institutionalized tribute to
Rizal.

In 1901, under the country’s first American
civil governor William Howard Taft, the
Rizal martyred by Spain not five years
before had become Philippine National
Hero regardless of whether any legislature,
Filipino or foreign, had declared him as
such. The Americans certainly had no
compunctions about assimilating the cult of
Rizal renaming districts, cities, and provinces
after Rizal — this, the Philippine Commission
undertook. It was also during the early years

of American Occupation that Rizal Day was
made an official holiday: On February 1,
1902, the Philippine Commission enacted
Act. No. 345 which set December 30 of each
year as Rizal Day, and made it one of the ten
official holidays of the Philippines.

It was during this period that construction
of a monument honoring Rizal received
colonial approval. On September 28, 1901,
Act No. 243 was passed, thus granting the
right to use public land in Luneta as the site
in which a statue of Rizal would be erected.
Act No. 243 likewise stipulated that the
monument would also house his remains.
Thus, a marker would forever serve as a
reminder of where the country’s National
Hero had fallen, his bones made sacred to
the budding Filipino nation.

[Act No. 243] also created a committee on
the Rizal monument that consisted of Pascual
Poblete, Paciano Rizal (the hero’s brother),
Juan Tuason, Teodoro R. Yangco, Mariano
Limjap, Maximo Paterno, Ramon Genato,
Tomas G. del Rosario, and Ariston Bautista.
The members were tasked, among others, with
raising funds through popular subscriptions.

The committee held an international design
competition between 1905-1907, and invited
sculptors from Europe and the United States
to submit entries with material preference
produced in the archipelago. The estimated
cost of the monument was PHPIOO.OOO,
including prizes for the winners of the design
contest. The insular government donated
PHP30.000 or the fund. By January 1905,
that goal had been oversubscribed. When
the campaign closed in August 1912, the
amount collected had reached PHP135.195.61.

On January 8, 1908, the judging committee-
composed of Governor-General Frank Smith,
John T. MacLeod, and Dr. Maximo M. Paterno—
officially announced its decision through the
press.

[From “The Rizal Monument,” by the United
Architects of the Philippines (UAP), accessed
at www.arkitektura.ph.]

IV. MONUMENTAL RIZAL

Forty entries were received by the 1907
deadline, and the bozetos (scale models)
of the shortlisted ten were displayed
at the Ayuntamiento in Intramuros.
Upon deliberation, the Committee on
the Rizal Monument declared the A1
Martir de Bagumbayan (To the Martyr of
Bagumbayan), an ornate neo-classical piece,
the winner of the design competition. The
design of Carlos Nicoli of Carrara, Italy was
awarded the first prize, worth P5,000. His
design depicted an 1 8m-tall monument, with
its 12m base rendered in two shades of gray
Italian marble, and the pedestal that held the
entire structure to be rendered in two shades
of white Italian marble. Elaborate figurative
elements dominated Nicoli’s design. The
contract, however, was ultimately awarded to
Swiss sculptor Richard Kissling for his bozeto
titled Motto Stella (Guiding Star), which had
won second place. According to Parks for a
Nation, “Nicoli was reportedly not able to
put up the construction bond required to
build the monument. Still others claimed his
designed was deemed too expensive as it used
Carrara marble.” Kissling’s design, which
would use unpolished granite and bronze,
naturally cost less than that of Nicoli’s, a
predominantly marble structure.

The Motto Stella, too, was an understated,
straightforward monument: Allegorical

figures arranged around an obelisk, with
the likeness of Rizal facing the sea. It was as
opposite from Nicoli’s lofty ornateness as a
sculpture could be, and criticism of Kissling’s
design surged. But the construction of the
monument pushed through, and the tribute to
Rizal — placed in daring proximity to the seat
of the Spanish colonial government — would
take four years to complete. Supervising the
casting was Rizal’s good friend, the painter
Felix Resurrecion Hidalgo, who was less
than pleased with the result.

On December 29, 1912, a solemn ceremony
was held to finally bury Rizal’s remains at the
base of the monument that would soon rise
in his honor. His remains have been stored in
an ivory urn kept in his sister Narcisa Rizal’s
house in Binondo since their exhumation
on August 17, 1898. Before this, they lay
in a grave in Paco Cemetery, marked only
by a marble plaque with the hero’s initials
in reverse. On December 30, 1912, after a
funeral procession and a “lying-in-state” at
the Ayuntamiento de Manila, the urn bearing
Rizal’s remains was brought back to Luneta.
Thus, a year after the re-interment — more
than twelve years since the enactment of
Act No. 243, and seventeen years to the day
of his death — the monument to Rizal was
unveiled.

There is a curious serendipity to the choice of
Kissling’s design. It would not be ludicrous
to think that Rizal, who eschewed pomp and
circumstance and had expressly asked that
no fanfare be attached to his death, would
have approved of the simple and nearly
anonymous grave in Paco Cemetery. The

monument that would stand in his honor,
owing to the wishes of the people and the
sponsorship of the American government,
would have chafed — and Nicoli’s ornate
and nearly grandiose design would have
further gone against Rizal’s wishes. Kissling’s
obelisk, the sense of containment in its
unpolished granite, was a compromise — but
it better suited the principles of the man it
had been built to honor.

V. NATIONAL NECROPOLIS

American’s Manifest Destiny coexisted
uneasily with its own anti-colonial origins;
thus America debated how long the Filipinos
would be their wards: Would it be generations
or within a generation? And like the French
with their onevre civilisatrice, imperial
appropriation had to be disguised with Anglo-
Saxon stoicism — “take up the white man’s
burden,” as Rudyard Kipling had exhorted
the Americans.

Proof of this modernization and civilization,
this compromise between those anti-colonial
origins and the Benevolent Assimilation they
were now espousing would be to turn Taft’s
“little brown brothers” into the inhabitants
of an Oriental District of Columbia. As the
Americans had contrived for Rizal to be
their new wards’ counterpart to George
Washington, they proceeded to create a
Washington, D.C. in Manila.

The Rizal Monument, and the park that
cradled it, was at the heart of a master urban
architectural plan for the capital of the
Philippines, devised by the Chicago architect
and city planner, Daniel Burnham. In 1904,
United States Secretary of War and former

Governor General of the Philippines, William
Howard Taft commissioned Burnham —
via William Cameron Forbes, who would
eventually be Governor General himself — to
submit plans for the administrative capital of
Manila, and the proposed summer capital in
Baguio.

By then, Burnham — founder of the
City Beautiful movement — had already
spearheaded the planning commission of
a major renewal of Washington D.C., and
had designed the cities of Cleveland and San
Francisco. The City Beautiful aesthetic, which
Manila would naturally adopt, was marked
by neo-classical elements and derivatives of
it. [The City Beautiful aesthetic would have
been an apt backdrop for Nicoli’s winning-
but-bypassed design.]

Burnham then recommended William E.
Parsons, a graduate of the Ecole des Beaux-
Arts in France and a practicing architect in
New York, to oversee the implementation
of what was to be known, in legislation, as
“the Burnham plan for the improvement of
the city of Manila, and the Burnham plan
for the improvement of Baguio.” By virtue of
Philippine Commission Act No. 1495, enacted
on May 26, 1906, Parsons was appointed
Consulting Architect to the government,
and he would stay in the Philippines in this
capacity for the next nine years. His term
coincided with Forbes’; the two would work
closely together in the planning of the cities
of Manila and of Baguio, which included
projects such as the building of the Philippine
General Hospital, the Manila Hotel, and the
Mansion House in the highlands of Baguio.

In 1905, after a six-week stay in the

Philippines and barely four months after his
return to Chicago, Burnham submitted the
city plans for Manila to Secretary of War Taft;
of these plans, he wrote rather succinctly:
“The Manila scheme is very good.” The plans
were approved within two months and orders
for their implementation given immediately.

Burnham had prepared a big plan for Manila to
match the aspirations of an emerging player
in world affairs. The Burnham Plan had five
major design directives: 1) the development of
the waterfront and the location of parks and
parkways so as to give adequate opportunities
for recreation to every quarter in the city; 2)
the establishment of a street system, which
would secure direct and easy communication
from every part of the city, to every other
sector or district; 3) the location of building
sites for various activities; 4) the development
of waterways for transportation; and 5) the
provision of summer resorts.

The plan included all elements of a classic
City Beautiful plan. It had a central civic
core. Radials emanating from this core
were laid over a gridiron pattern and large
parks interconnected by parkways. In this
core, which Burnham located beside the old
city [of Intramuros], government buildings
were arranged in a formal pattern around
a rectangular mall (“mall” here refers to a
linear formal open space defined by trees
or buildings). This mall is reminiscent of the
National Mall in Washington D.C. and is, in
fact, roughly the same width and orientation.
The layout differed from the Spanish “Laws of
the Indies” configuration [the design adopted
within Intramuros], in that the focus was civic
space and government buildings and did not
include religious structures.

Completing the civic ensemble were the Hall
of Justice complex, located south of the mall,
and semi-public buildings such as libraries,
museums, and permanent exposition buildings
all along a drive towards the north. The core
then was not intended to be the Rizal Park
we know today, although a monument to a
national hero was part of the plan.

[...] In designing the civic complex, a la
Washington D.C., one of the first elements the
American civil government wanted to put up
was Manila's equivalent of the Washington
monument. For this, the Americans chose
Dr. Jose Rizal; his monument was to rise at
the center of the projected new civic mall.
Unfortunately, the monument's location was
determined not by the actual spot where Rizal
was executed but slightly south of it because
of the geometry and the width required of the
Burnham-designed mall. [...] As in Washington
D.C., the orientation of the mall was towards
a body of water. When Burnham surveyed the
old Luneta site, however, he found, that the new
port works had blocked the view of Manila Bay.
To correct this and to create a large pleasure
park, he proposed that the area in front of the
old Luneta be extended a thousand feet.

[From Parks for a Nation: The Rizal Park and
50 Years of the National Parks Development
Committee, published by the NPDC.]

Thus it was that the American-sponsored
Burnham Plan unwittingly mirrored the
spirit of the Spaniards’ transformation of
the marshland by Bagumbayan. Whereas the
ruling elite of the peninsulares transformed
a tract of land into a venue for the rigodon
of the promenade — and having it serve a
second purpose as a killing field for Filipino

insurrectos who’d betrayed the Spanish
government; the Americans, to coax loyalty
from their new “possessions,” turned this
same landscape as a tribute to a martyred
ilustrado, and the centerpiece of a Manila that
had overthrown the Old World regime. And in
parallel with the Luneta’s macabre underside
during the Spanish era, the Americans had
built a necropolis to serve as an administrative
and cultural center — a tomb of the martyred
man as the centerpiece of an elaborate
transformation of the capital.

And the secular cult of Rizal, too, had been
set in motion; it would be unlike the height
of the Revolution, when his writings served
as sacred text and his image stood as the
rendering of a pagan god looking out at secret,
seditious meetings. Rizal was now both icon
and institution — but this time out in the open:
a guide to the laying down of roads, now a
monument at whose foot all roads would
literally converge: for the monument would
be Kilometer Zero, in the manner of classical
antiquity, where all roads converged in Rome.

But the Rizal of the Americans — the new
Roman-inspired metropolis — was not to be.
By 1916, the debate on whether America
would permanently keep, or let go, of the
colony had been settled; and the grand
plan of Burnham was implemented more
in the breach in a combination of Filipino
protestations of economizing — no grand
capitol would be built, the legislature, instead,
taking over and remodeling what had been
intended to be the National Library — and
American extravagance: Governor General
Francis Burton Harrison used funds intended
for the Burnham Plan to build an Executive
Building in Malacanan Palace, closing down

the governor general’s office in Intramuros,
sounding the death-knell of the walled city as
administrative heart of the colony and firmly
charting the future extramuros.

It would be the Second World War that would
obliterate the last vestiges of Rizal’s Manila:
bombed by the Japanese in the opening
weeks of the war, the Japanese too would
eliminate the last traces of the Spanish-era
Luneta, as Imperial Japanese forces dug
foxholes around the Rizal Monument and
turned both Old and New Luneta into a
battleground. Retreating into Intramuros and
the neoclassical buildings of the government,
the Japanese were systematically shelled and
set on fire with flame-throwers by Allied
forces, reducing the metropolis to rubble.

It was amidst the ruins of Liberated
Manila that the Rizal Monument served
as the backdrop — literally overshadowed
and hidden from sight by a temporary
grandstand — for the Independence
Ceremonies on July 4, 1946, when at last
the Philippine flag was hoisted to fly alone
for the first time since the defeat of the First
Republic. The first act of appropriation of
the Third Republic would be to mark the
spot where the ceremonies took place, with
a monumental flagpole — the Independence
Flagpole — and to build, on a permanent
basis, the Independence Grandstand on what
had been the American-era New Luneta. In
the Independence Grandstand, on December
30 — Rizal Day — would unfold, every four
years, the ritual of republican, democratic
transition: the inaugurals of presidents,
who would take their oath of office, so to
speak, with Rizal as their witness, and
the Independence Flagpole signifying the
independence of the nation.

VI. GHOSTS OF PLANS PAST

Thus did Philippine governments —

administrations — after the Second World War
attempt to consciously appropriate Rizal’s
legacy, not least by way of the Rizal Monument
and the Luneta. In much the same way the first
digressions from the Burnham Plan — in the
prewar years, capped with the dream of a new
capital to rise in Quezon City in a symbolic
slaying of colonialism — the landscape changed
according to national mood and, especially,
the decisions of those in power — be it whim,
advocacy, or political maneuver.

In the late 1950s, President Ramon
Magsaysay reserved the Luneta exclusively
for park purposes and had trouble resisting
persistent official pressure from groups who
wished to exploit the park for their own
pet projects. One group strongly lobbied to
use Luneta as the site of a national cultural
center, envisioning the construction of a
National Library, a National Museum, and
a National Theater. But not a few persons
decried the plans to mark the huge, open
park — prompting a newspaper columnist
to comment, “Luneta has been ruthlessly
butchered, cut up to small, useless areas
assigned for incongruous uses.” The
arguments went on, silenced only by the
death of the major protagonists. In the
end, the Rizal Memorial Cultural Center
was approved; Magsaysay himself laid the
cornerstone of the only building that would
be completed, the National Library.

In the meantime, the park lay bare and
unkempt; the Rizal Monument neglected,
muddy in the rain and surrounded with
tall cogon in the summer. The Luneta —
now Rizal Park — was, like so many grand

projects of the newly-independent nation,
much better on paper than it turned out in
reality. Foundations were laid; but not much
else.

Then the Centennial of Rizal inspired a spurt
of activity. The most infamous, if drastic,
revision to Kissling’s original vision was
made in the Rizal Centennial Year of 1961:
A stainless steel pylon was superimposed
over the granite obelisk, thus increasing the
structure’s height from 12.7 meters to 30.5
meters. The remodeling undertaken by the
Jose Rizal National Centennial Commission
(JRNCC) — and designed by Juan Nakpil,
who would later become the first National
Artist for Architecture — was widely

criticized. (The mild furor was not unlike
the one met by the original Committee on
the Rizal Monument when they awarded
the contract to Kissling.) The towering steel
pylon only lent an incongruity — gleaming
where the base was somber and unpolished,
drawing the eye away from the bronze figure
of Rizal. Nakpil, in defense to the criticisms,
quoted former Secretary of Education and
then JRNCC chair Manuel Lim: That the
taller pylon would serve as a convenient
guide for incoming sea vessels, as well as
a beacon for citizens navigating their way
within Manila. Two years later, the steel
shaft — which had cost the government
P145,000 — was removed, upon the directives
of Secretary of Education Alejandro Roces
and Director of Public Libraries Carlos
Quirino. According to the United Architects
of the Philippines (UAP), the steel revision
to the Rizal Monument “was dismantled
during Holy Week, reportedly to prevent
any court injunction from restraining them
as government offices were closed during
holidays.”

The removal of the pylon, however, only
signalled a rush to employ beautification
efforts. Newspaper columnist Teodoro
Valencia, who was among those, who had
bitterly protested the JRNCC’s “tampering”
of the Rizal monument, announced publicly
that he would try to give the monument
and the surrounding area a facelift: “The
original plan was to clean the monument
itself, put it in a few flower pots to give it
some respectability. But the support and
the money started flowing in.” In a week’s
time, P30,000 had been donated to their
cause. The approach to the monument
was cemented, lights were installed and a
few trees were planted. Valencia got the
Philippine Army’s approval to put an honor
guard. The National Parks Development
Committee was subsequently organized,
taking on long-planned but never-effected
projects: The beautification of the sea wall,
the renovations to the grandstand. After
decades of being dormant — and accounting
the unpopular revision of the JNRCC in the
early 1950s — civic society’s desire to witness
the park’s enlivening translated into cash
donations to the cause: During First Lady
Imelda Marcos’ term as NPDC chairman,
a total of P60 million would be donated
to the development of Rizal Park. Since its
inception, the National Parks Development
Committee (NPDC) has overseen and ensured
the upkeep and the necessary improvements
to the Rizal Park, and the tribute to Rizal
that lay at its core.

In the decades that have passed, interest in
the Luneta has waxed and waned, and the
weight of the Rizal Monument — which
has, over time, been adopted as among the
symbols of our nationhood — has nonetheless
flirted with the rote and the commonplace.

Every four, then six years, across an expanse
of field from the bronze figure of Rizal,
Presidents-elect would take their oaths to
serve the Philippines and its people: only
President Corazon C. Aquino would not
take her oath there; even Presidents Estrada
(who took his oath in Baroasoain) in 1998
and Arroyo (who took her first in the EDSA
Shrine, and her second in Cebu) in 2004,
delivered their inaugural addresses at the
Quirino Grandstand (as the Independence
Grandstand had come to be known). When
a typhoon demolished the Independence
Flagpole in the 1970s, it was rebuilt; and it
was here, as Ninoy Aquino’s funeral cortege
slowly made its way escorted by millions,
that what the dictatorship denied the Filipino
people themselves undertook: the flag in
front of the Rizal Monument lowered to half
mast, in symbolic tribute from the Republic’s
protomartyr to its new martyr of democracy.

The Rizal Monument, too, is the silent party
in the ritual obeisance that foreign leaders
pay to the most bravo of the indios. In 1998,
during a state visit in the Centennial Year of
the First Republic, King Juan Carlos of Spain
and his consort Queen Sofia stood before
tomb of Jose P. Rizal and laid a wreath against
its base. In the shadow of Intramuros, before
the final resting place of the man who was
shot as enemy number one, the descendant of
the last king to rule over the Philippines paid
his homage. Closure, had come: symbolically,
the breach had been healed. But few Filipinos
noticed this act of racial and national
vindication. Just as few Filipinos may be
aware, and much less care, about the ghosts
of plans whose grandeur perhaps spoke little
to contemporary Filipinos at the time. But
then, as now, Rizal remains preeminent: focal

point of Manila; premier monument of the
nation; and gathering place of the ordinary,
who picnic and wander in a park under the
shadow of the man whose dreams for them
outlived that moment when the rifles fired,
and when, in a last effort of will, he turned
to fall facing the rising sun.

The tomb and memorial to Filipino
nationalist Jose P. Rizal stands right by the
edge of Manila, at the heart of a landscape
bearing the much-vaunted histories it helped
launch.

Its principal form, an obelisk of unpolished
granite rising 12.7 meters toward the sky,
is as straightforward a sculptural marker as
a monument can be: Here lie the remains
of Rizal, it announces, its duty as signpost
and landmark thus achieved. The figure of
Rizal follows the same simple aesthetic: It is
a Rizal made restive in bronze, cradling the
books that have lent to his legacy and in an
overcoat that hangs just a little too boxy for
his frame. This figure stands conspicuous,
too, however: His garb is unsuited to the
tropics — a reminder that he lived his life as an
ilustrado in the stranger, colder climes of the
European continent — and the underscoring
of the scholarly air further sets him apart
from the riotous revolution that led, if
indirectly, to his death. It is a Rizal whose
very rendering eschewed the revolutionary
glory that had been continually thrust upon
him, a glory that he could nonetheless rightly
stake a claim to. His gaze does not even meet
the sea; this is a Rizal that offers no dares,
dispenses no threat. In a pensive mood, the
Rizal of the monument angles his head ever
so slightly — toward the Walled City, perhaps
by chance.

As an object, then, the monument shies
away from magnificence. It does not tower,
there are no ornate details, no grandiose
aesthetic claims. It is the land that surrounds
it, however, the land on which it rose, that
resonates with the history Rizal was party
to and his memory helped cultivate — the
stories of centuries-long subjugation, of
“benevolent” assimilation, of city-razing
warfare, of politicians eager to attach their
names to that of the national hero’s. It is the
Luneta — an annexed tract of land beyond
the seat of the Spanish colonial government
and religious authority; the centerpiece of
the holistic overhauling of new Western
conquerors, for both good and bad; and the
machinations of politicians in the past half a
century — that bears for the Rizal Monument
the burdens of the historical narrative that it
hosted — a historical narrative that is of all us
Filipinos’.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alcazaren, Paulo. The Rizal Park and SO
Years of the National Parks Development
Committee. Manila: National Parks

Development Committee, 2013.

Ellis, Henry. Hong Kong To Manilla and the
Lakes of Luzon in the Philippines Isles in the
Year 1856. London: Smith Elder and Co.,
1859.

Guerrero, Leon Maria. The First Filipino: A
Biography of ]ose Rizal. Manila: National
Heroes Commission, 1963.

Joaquin, Nick. “The Other Manila, December
13, 1952.” Philippines Free Press, accessed

March 16, 2016. https://philippinesfreepress.
wordpress. com/1 952/12/13/the-other-
manila-december- 13-1952/.

Palafox, Quennie Ann. “Historical Context
and Legal Basis of Rizal Day and other
Memorials in Honor of Jose Rizal.” National
Historical Commission of the Philippines.
Accessed March 16, 2016. http://nhcp.gov.
ph/historical-context-and-legal-basis-of-
rizal-day-and-other-memorials-in-honor-of-
jose-rizal/.

Palafox, Quennie Ann. “Why we Celebrate
Rizal Day every 30th Day of December.”
National Historical Commission of the
Philippines, accessed March 16, 2016. http://
nhcp.gov.ph/why-we-celebrate-rizal-day-
every-30th-day-of-december/.

Villegas, Danny. “The Story of the Rizal
Monument.” Rizaliana Media, accessed
March 16, 2016. http://myrizall50.

com/2011/06/the-story-of-the-rizal-
monument/.

Mabini’s Revolt

SASHA MARTINEZ, ADRIAN BACCAY, RONALDO RECTO,
AND FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 150th birth anniversary of
Apolinario Mabini, July 23, 2014]

Apolinario Mabini has been relegated to
being a minor player in our pantheon of
heroes. He is not a figure with well-defined
virtues, hence our inability to assign to him
iconic status that can appease our need for a
clear-cut hero.

Relative to his contemporaries, his personal
and professional lives have been defined
predominantly by what he was not. He was
not — like Emilio Aguinaldo, whose hand
he guided in the creation of a republic — a
provincial official-turned-soldier who led
the struggle for independence on horseback.
He was not, like Andres Bonifacio — whose
execution, and the methods with which it
was enacted, Mabini disapproved of — a
proletarian patriot who roused the capital.

The closest comparison we could make of
Mabini is to Jose Rizal, the nation’s foremost
man of letters, the very symbol of sacrifice in

the name freedom and fellowmen. Both were
learned, both strove to reach beyond the
limitations of the pejorative indio. Rizal and
Mabini — ilustrados both — took from the
European intelligentsia what they could and
translated that philosophy into their protest
against foreign rule.

But Rizal came from provincial gentry, and
became part of the liberal ferment in Europe;
Mabini was the homegrown intellectual of
genuinely more modest means, who occupied
himself with the inner workings of Philippine
politics and government. Both were fervent
disciples of logic, reason, independent
thinking, and ethics; both were vocal in their
belief that human dignity and the agency of
the individual should be prized above else.
Their work reflected this philosophy — but
whereas Rizal channeled his beliefs into
literature and science, Mabini drew on them
in dedicating himself to legal and political
theory, and their application to governance.

Mabini, like other Filipino intellectuals
of his time, was the product of European
scholarship — and it is this beyond -indio-

bounds tutelage that placed him and his
ilk under suspicion by Spain. (His debility,
however, allowed him to be overlooked
by Spain in their hunt for revolutionaries:
Mabini was also once dismissed as a suspect
of a disturbance after the Spanish saw he
could not move his legs.) Although arguably
drawing from European academic tradition,
Mabini’s local education could well serve
as the example of just how far one can rise
through tenacity and perseverance, as well as a
healthy respect for the transfigurative powers
of education; his is the hero’s journey —
pantomimed in many a telenovela — from the
probinsiya to the halls of national power.

Mabini was the son of an illiterate peasant
and a market vendor; every day, he crossed
the mountains of Tanauan, Batangas, to
attend his classes at the poblacion. He
entered the Colegio de San Juan de Letran
in threadbare clothing, worked part-time as
a teacher of children to augment his funds.
After earning a bachelor’s degree and the
title of “Profesor de Segunda Ensenanza,”
he took up law at the University of Santo
Tomas. There, he found himself among an
elite class of young intellectuals who would
later on lead the Philippine revolution and,
subsequently, the First Republic; as Rafael
Palma notes, “Never in the memory of the
University had so many vigorous minds and
such well-equipped talent been gathered
together in a single hall.”

But in that brilliant few — which included
a future Manila mayor, a future provincial
governor, two future assemblymen, and
several future judges and lawyers — Mabini
“stood out like a star of the first magnitude”.
After passing the licentiate examination

in jurisprudence, Mabini became not only
a legal luminary, but also an exceptional
political theorist whose philosophy guided
both the revolution and the future republic.
So much so that Aguinaldo tapped him to
undertake a crucial, yet now-overlooked,
role in the fledgling government — that of
providing a solid legal foundation to the
First Republic.

The dominant image we have of Mabini’s
role in the making of our nation is that
he was, at the very least, a silent clerk
pushing papers for men holding a higher
power — and, at best, that he was a legal
luminary and brilliant statesman who built
the bureaucratic foundation of the infant
republic of Aguinaldo. Yet it remains an
unromantic image, especially when set against
a backdrop of heroes — rebels thundering for
liberty, stone-faced soldiers conspiring for
independence, or a man writing from within
a stone cell a poem of farewell to his beloved
country. And whereas Rizal, protomartyr
and national hero, died valiantly by the word
of the Spanish government — Mabini died,
inelegantly, ungallantly, quietly, of cholera.

Mabini has been, to rely on common
shorthand, the “sublime paralytic,” that
prefixing adjective having long been a rote
appendage. It is time to shift the focus on the
sublime, to acknowledge and evangelize that
his influence was not bound to the reach of
his limbs.

Mabini’s ability to transcend his debility
was afforded to him by, among other
things, the changing world around him. As
we learn more about the man Mabini had
been, the starker his placing in the start of

the Philippines’ modern era. The culture of
shortening the distance between information
and its receiver began in Mabini’s time —
with Mabini as a prime example of the
modernization, given his being an active user
of the technology made available to him,
using it to further expand his worldview.
(And, here, we can argue that whereas Rizal
remains “the First Filipino,” it was Mabini
who fully embraced being the First Modern
Filipino.)

Such technology made available at the time
was the telegraph, which connected the
Philippines to the rest of the world. Mabini
used the telegraph in tandem with traditional
correspondence, occasionally transmitting
presidential decrees to generals and troops.
(Mabini, notably, wrote in a letter to Galicano
Apacible dated January 6, 1899, “Conflict
with the Americans seems imminent and
inevitable ... I already telegraphed our
friends to publish the protests. Neither the
Government nor the people agree to any
usurpation. Prepare the expedition as soon
as possible.”)

The connection made it possible to view
the Philippines from the outside — Mabini’s
actions were not only informed by his
experience within the country, but also
from outside it. This access to information
lent a well-roundedness to his insight;
it emphasized his own standards and
principles regarding the universality of law
and implications of legality. In vindication
of his position that the American occupation
of the Philippines was, itself to the American
people, unconstitutional, Mabini cites
foreign clippings: “Public opinion in America
asks for the prompt suspension of hostilities

MABINI

Though a paraplegic, Apolinario Mabini (1863 - 1903) is
recognized as the great political philosopher of the Philippines
istory calls him the “Sublime Paralytic”). He was a lawyer,
prime minister of the First Republic, the first Philippine
minister of foreign affairs, the intellectual defender of a
young Philippine Republic, and an advocate for the
importation of modernist ideas into the archipelago.

li lived at an exciting time in world history: the dawn of the
:h century, when technology and rapid exchange of information were
beginning to define the world. People say his ideas were ahead of his time,
but one could also argue that he was truly a product of his age. Here are some of the technologies
that flourished in Mabini's modem world.

Cinematograph

Projection

On January 1, 1897, the first films in
the Philippines were shown,
namely: Un Homme Au Chapeau,

Line scene de danse Japanaise, Lex
Boxers, and La Place deL'Opera,
projected using the 60mm
Gaumont Chrono-photograph
projector at the Salon dc Pertierra,

No. 12 Escolta, Manila. 12 On August
1897. a Spanish soldier named
Antonio Ramos was able to import the
Lumiere Cinematograph to the Philippines. With financial backing, he was able to show 30 films via
the Lumiere on August 29, 1897, also at Escolta. The first movie houses were also established during
the time of Mabini. These were the Cine Waigrah. established in 1900 in Intramuros. and the second
one, Gran CinematographoParisien, established in 1902 in Quiapo. Afterwards, more affordable
movie houses opened, such as the famous Cine Anda and Empire, in 1909.' There is no evidence
however, that Mabini was able to watch any of these films.

Telegraph

Mabini, as Aguinaldo's adviser and as Prime
Minister, used the telegraph numerous times to
communicate presidential decrees to Filipino
troops, as tensions rose between the Filipino and
American forces that culminated in the
Philippine-American War. The telegraph was
also Mabini’s connection to distant places like
Hong Kong, France, and Japan.*

"J am thoroughly informed of the telegrams from

Telephone

The telephone, believe it or not, was a constant m
Mabini. Accused by many in the Malolos Congress for being the
“Devil’s Advocate to the President,” Mabini felt that he should
keep distance from President Aguinaldo. He moved out of
Aguinaldo’s house to a humble residence, against the President’s
wishes. But President Aguinaldo installed a telephone in
Mabini’s house, much to Mabini’s protestations. 5

Gatling Gun

One of the best known early rapid-firing
weapons, and the prototype of the modern
machine gun, the Gatlinggun was invented
by Richard Gatling. It was first used in the
American Civil War. By the
Spanish-American War, the same guns
were used by the Americans to defeat the
Spanish forces on land. Many of these
weapons were in use along the 16-mile
American lines surrounding Intramuros
and its environs when the fighting broke
out on February 4, 1899, signalling the
beginning of the Philippine-American War.
Gatling guns were used to fire upon the
Filipino lines with devastating effect on Filipi

Image rendered by the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office
(PCDSPO)

and the recall of the troops, as the imperialist
policy of McKinley is meeting with serious
opposition.” (It is interesting to note that
Mabini had once proposed that English
be used as the language of instruction — a
thinking ahead of his time, anticipating
perhaps the universality and the ease of access
that the language would afford Filipinos.)

Mabini was able to access newspapers from
other countries and, from articles written
about the Philippines, was able to draw a
nuanced picture of the country, incorporating
trends and perspectives from friends and foes
alike abroad. In an article he wrote about
America’s presence in the Philippines, he
cited the French newspaper L’ Independence
Tonkinoise, which said “that the American
conquerors have become the prisoners of
the conquered Filipinos who did not want
to become American subjects.” Another
foreign publication, the Singapore Free Press,
has been cited in his correspondence and
arguments versus the American occupation,
quoting: “The Government of Washington, in
disregard of its true stand in the Philippines,
took a very stupid move, making the Filipinos
realize that the promised of freedom they had
espoused at the beginning of the war were
aimed at territorial expansion.”

Mabini’s inclinations were in the theory of law
and the implications of legality, which was a
practice of logic and reason. He pined for
equality and freedom and valued the manner
in which the pair was achieved — thus leading
him to ultimately disagree with the manner
in which independence was proclaimed, the
provision of Malolos, and the lack of firmness
in negotiating with the United States — in the
suspicion that the policy to seek autonomous

government under the Americans was not
only a contradiction, but a violation of the
Malolos Constitution.

What is striking about Mabini’s participation
in the First Republic is his having stood as
its voice of reason. He provided a political
philosophy that would shape an autonomous
leadership of a country long suppressed, as
well as the legal structure to ensure that this
was a leadership that could sustain itself,
well into the future. Mabini was cognizant of
building an institution of democracy right at
its birthing, and he did as such from secure
legal foundations of his making.

But for all his insistence on the right thing
and on the right way of doing things, for all
the intellectual rigor he devoted to ensuring
a true government, he would end up cast
as the contrarian, harbinger of unpopular
opinions. This is most evident in his tempered
but nonetheless scathing critique of the
aftermath of the Philippine revolution, where
he pits political theory against the practical
science of government — saying it is precisely
the failure to heed the former that leads to
ultimate failure of the latter:

It is true that whoever attempts to govern
on the basis of theories alone is bound to
fail because the science of government is
essentially practical; but it is also true that
all practices contrary to theory, that is to say,
contrary to reason and science, can fittingly
be termed abuses, that is to say, corrupt
practices, since they can corrupt society. The
ruler's success is always to be found in the
adjustment of his practical measures to the
natural and immutable order of things and to
the special needs of the locality, an adjustment

that can be made with the help of theoretical
knowledge and experience. The source of all
failures in government can therefore be found,
not in theories but in unprincipled practices
arising from base passions or ignorance.

The writer and diplomat Leon Ma. Guerrero
memorably observed that we Filipinos
“have a national fondness for tragedy, and
the essence of tragedy is that the virtuous
man suffers because of his very virtues.” In
Mabini, then, we find a man given token
acknowledgement by both history and
historiography — because he was not a
soldier or a rebel, not a cosmopolitan martyr.
We have — in our fondness for dramatic
martyrs and bolo-wielding guerillas — made
the memory of Mabini suffer because his
foremost virtue, that of being an intellectual,
simply did not appeal. The image of a
paralytic, bent over papers, dictating missives
to be sent by telegraph — this starkly modern,
undeniably pragmatic image set against the
romance of the Philippine Revolution was
too abrupt a departure from the motif.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Guerrero, Leon Maria. We, Filipinos. Manila:
Daily Star Publishing, 1984.

Mabini, Apolinario. The Philippine
Revolution. Manila: National Historical
Commission, 1969.

National Heroes Commission, The Letters of
Apolinario Mabini, Manila: National Heroes
Commission, 1965.

Philippine Magazine Volumes 12-13, Manila:
1913.

The Mabini Republic

SASHA MARTINEZ, ADRIAN BACCAY, AND RONALDO RECTO

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 150th birth anniversary of
Apolinario Mabini, July 23, 2014]

True honour can be discerned in the simple
manifestations of an upright and honest soul,
not in brilliant pomp and ornament, which
scarcely serve to mask the deformities of the
body. True honour is attained by teaching
our minds to recognize truth, and training
our hearts to love it. The recognition of truth
shall lead us to the recognition of our duties
and of justice, and by performing our duties
and doing justice we shall be respected and
honoured, whatever our station in life. Let us
never forget that we are on the first rung of
our national life, and that we are called upon to
rise, and can go upward only on the ladder of
virtue and heroism. Let us not forget that, if we
do not grow, we shall have died without ever
having been great, unable to reach maturity,
which is proper of a degenerate race.

— From The Philippine Revolution by
Apolinario Mabini, translated from the Spanish
by Leon Ma. Guerrero.

Upon the establishment of the First Republic,
Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy needed a legal
luminary to take the infant government
by hand in its first steps. This role fell on

Apolinario Mabini — “a star of the first
magnitude,” as Rafael Palma would later
describe him.

Mabini proved to be more than capable to
fulfill this responsibility within Aguinaldo’s
rule; through the first official documents
of the Philippine republic that Mabini
demonstrated his usual intellectual flare.

Decree after decree, he organized the
administration of justice and human rights
under the new republic; letter after letter,
he explained why the American occupation
of the Philippines was illegal; section after
section, he debated with his comrades on the
draft Malolos Constitution.

Indeed, his ideas became even more
indispensable after independence was
proclaimed; by this time, Mabini had played
a more public role as the country’s first
prime minister and top diplomat, and had
the experience in government to provide a
sharper analysis of self-governance in the
Philippines.

Later in his life, Mabini would take on
the more unenviable, contentious task of
excoriating the very government he had
helped establish — scoring personalities for
their greed and their corruption, for the

100

self-interests that threatened the dignity
of hard-earned democratic institutions.
Acknowledging the incendiary nature of
his account of the First Republic, Mabini
nonetheless insists on its necessity:

"I do not see anything wrong in examining our
past in order to draw up a balance-sheet of our
failures, mistakes, and weaknesses; whoever
voluntarily confesses his sins shows at least
a praiseworthy and honourable purpose of
amendment and correction.”

But Leon Ma. Guerrero, in his introduction to
Apolinario Mabini’s The Philippine Revolution ,
offers up an astute encapsulation of the Mabini:

“Righteous, perceptive, and farsighted
beyond the measure of his contemporaries
and successors, the very embodiment of
the intellectual in a revolution, he was not
so intransigent as he was thought to be, as
the following pages will show. Among the
Filipinos, he was one of the few who knew
what it was all about.”

In his essay on the statesman’s legacy, “The
Relevance of Mabini’s Social Ideas to Our
Times,” Moro historian Cesar Adib Majul
examined the coexistent duality of Mabini’s
political ideology — which he consistently
applied to his response to the first mass
uprising against Spain and to the science of
self-governance in the newly formed republic,
and which can be seen in his critique of the
Aguinaldo government.

Adib Majul notes that Mabini held the
fervent belief that an individual was born
with immense intellectual and moral
capacities and that he has been equipped
with the natural impulse to cultivate these
faculties. And for Mabini, the very nature of

a colonial regime deprived his people of the
freedom to develop those faculties, to attain
la mayor suma de libertades, conocimientos,
bienes y seguridades para los ciudadanos —
that is (to use the popular Lockean saying):
“the right to life, liberty, and property” and,
in addition, the right to education. Mabini
also believed that individuals could unite
and stand in solidarity, their collective
strength — and the ability to nurture one’s
intellectual and moral faculties — allowing
them to wrest control back. Thus did Mabini
justify the revolution against Spain. By
implication, Mabini viewed independence
as the fundamental prerequisite to attain the
individual freedom of all Filipinos.

Mabini’s initial optimism on independence,
to take on Adib Majul’s exposition, can be
traced back to some of the assumptions
underpinning his political philosophy.
First, as mentioned earlier, Man’s natural
impulse to develop his mental and emotional
capacities will lead him to topple down any
obstacle to his progress. Second, in the face
of common danger, and coupled with love of
country and countrymen, the people united
would set aside their class and regional
differences. And lastly, the conception of a
greater good will make men sublimate their
personal interests to the former.

From these abovementioned premises, the
revolution’s failure to turn the promise of
independence into something palpable and
tangible to the people can be attributed to
the perversion of self-governance; that the
people in government had failed to conceive
the general good of the nation, that they
had put personal and family gain over the
interests of the people.

Mabini’s prose soars when he scores the

101

defeat of independence, of true government,
of service. Nearing the conclusion of his The
Philippine Revolution , Mabini unleashes a
condemnation that’s singular for its honesty,
considering how fast the frictionalism had
replaced brotherhood in the new, so-called
democratic institution of government:

The Revolution failed because it was badly
led; because its leader won his post by
reprehensible rather than meritorious acts;
because instead of supporting the men most
useful to the people, he made them useless out
of jealousy. Identifying the aggrandizement
of the people with his own, he judged the
worth of men not by their ability, character,
and patriotism but rather by their degree of
friendship and kinship with him; and, anxious
to secure the readiness of his favourites to
sacrifice themselves for him, he was tolerant
even of their transgressions. Because he thus
neglected the people, the people forsook him;
and forsaken by the people, he was bound
to fall like a waxen idol melting in the heat of
adversity. God grant we do not forget such
a terrible lesson, learnt at the cost of untold
suffering.

One can almost imagine the man with his
fingers steepled before him, in his merciless
condemnation of Aguinaldo’s actions.
The entire book is, tonally, of quiet self-
righteousness — the kind of self-righteousness
seemingly unburdened by ego, and reliant
only on the knowledge and what is true and
what is right. Paragraphs after taking “Mr.
Aguinaldo” to task for botching both the
revolution and the government that preceded
it — for “[believing] that one can serve his
country with honour and glory only from a
high office” — Mabini gives an admonition
all the more stinging in its gentleness: “Mr.

Aguinaldo should not despair. [...] He can
still make up for his past and recapture the
general esteem with worthy deeds. He is still
young and has shown in natural sagacity in
making the most of circumstances for his
own ends, questionable as they were because
he lacked the culture and virtue demanded
by his office.”

Mabini’s belief in doing the right and
honorable thing was marked also by his
pragmatism, his conscientiousness, and his
refusal to mince words. This is as evident in
two adjacent sentences in his introductory
manifesto to his account of the Philippine
revolution: “We fought in the conviction
that our dignity and sense of duty required
the sacrifice of defending our freedoms as
long as we could, since without them social
equality between the dominant class and the
native population would be impossible in
practice and perfect justice among us could
not have been achieved. Yet we knew it would
not be long before our scant resources were
exhausted, our defeat inevitable.” Here he was
in the tradition of Cassandra — the prophet of
Greek myth who saw too much of the future,
yet cursed in her lifetime to never be believed.

Apolinario Mabini, for all his tireless
efforts in ensuring true independence — an
independence and, subsequently, a government
that was founded on the principle of popular
sovereignty — is in danger of remaining the
unseen hand that he was in his lifetime. His
intellectual stance, his insistence on relying
on political theory to launch the science of
government, his refusal to confine unpopular
opinions to himself — in his very adamance at
being the voice of reason, Mabini risked being
relegated to mere adviser or cast as humble
paper-pusher.

102

But Mabini’s was a noble calling. Mabini’s
was a reasonable idealism — founded on honor
and the decency of men (especially of those in
positions of authority), but tempered with the
unflinching acknowledgement of limitations
yet to be conquered.

“Fighting to the limits of our strength and of
reasonableness,” Mabini writes, “all we have
accomplished has been to show our love of
freedom.” It’s the kind of check-and-balance
that remains in government today, a check-
and-balance reliant on level-headedness, on
knowledge, and above all, on the belief in
public service and in doing the right thing for
the people one has committed to.

His stance toward independence was always
marked by its temperance. He was lukewarm
to the idea of revolution in 1896; but while
a faction of the ilustrados yearned and
campaigned for statehood from Spain, Mabini
was of those who believed in a Commonwealth
model: To have his countrymen’s status
elevated from indio to subjects, to have
autonomy over the country and yet retain the
protection of the motherland. When war with
the Americans broke out, faith in achieving
independence had begun to wane among the
ilustrado set — but Mabini was among those
that remained steadfast. While Aguinaldo
resolved to keep fighting, keep wresting
control of his homeland from new conquerors,
Mabini on the other hand understood that
after “fighting to the limits of our strength and
of reasonableness” an alternative to defeat
was welcome: The Philippines could ask from
America what we had originally wanted from
Spain; that is: to become its province, with an
eye toward independence in the future.

It is imperative that Mabini’s temperance
and pragmatism should not be seen as a
defeatist attitude — it, in fact, underscores his
unwavering belief in the nation. Mabini knew
that whether under American or Spanish rule,
regardless of statehood or commonwealth
granted by conquerors, the Philippines had
already become a country; it had, by virtue of
its campaigns and its sacrifices, become a true
nation. And a true government, with sound
democratic institutions, was only befitting.
Mabini understood that its achievement was
inevitable.

His life’s work has a belated, but ultimately
fulfilling, vindication: Thirteen years after
Mabini’s death, the United States of America
conceded: Philippine Independence and self-
governance was pledged in the Jones Law of
1916. Its fulfillment was made certain with
the Commonwealth’s inaugural in 1935. It
became a formality in 1946 — when at long
last, Filipinos became fully responsible for
their triumphs and failures, as an independent
people.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mabini, Apolinario. The Philippine
Revolution. Manila: National Historical
Commission, 1969.

National Heroes Commission, The Letters of
Apolinario Mabini. Manila: National Heroes
Commission, 1965.

Majul, Cesar Adib. “Islam and Philippine
Society: The Writings of Cesar Adib Majul.”
Asian Studies 46: 1-2. Quezon City:

University of the Philippines Press, 2010.

103

Mabini Shrine and Bridge

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the 150th birth anniversary of
Apolinario Mabini, July 23, 2014]

I. THE MABINI BRIDGE

Nagtahan Bridge was built sometime
between January to February 1945, initially
as a pontoon bridge crossing the Pasig River,
connecting the towns of Sta. Mesa and
Paco 111 It was used as a bridge to transport
United States Army jeeps and evacuate
citizens caught in the crossfire during the
Liberation of Manila. Prior to World War II,
plans for a bridge to connect the Mendiola
route to Malacanan Palace was conceived,
but construction did not push through! 21
The pontoon bridge remained in place for
decades after the war. On August 17, 1960,
a barge rammed against the wooden piles of
the bridge, causing the bridge to tilt; nearby
residences were also flooded! 31

In 1963, a permanent bridge was finally
constructed and was named Nagtahan;
it connected Paco with the Pandacan
District. Prior to construction, the Mabini

'iwr

PHOTO: Nagtahan Bridge from Correos Filipinas
Tumblr, February 1945. Photo courtesy of Manuel L.
Quezon III.

Shrine (the former residence of Apolinario
Mabini) was situated on the north bank,
thus prompting the government to move the
house to another location. On the occasion
of Mabini ’s 103rd birth anniversary on July
22, 1967, in recognition of the bridge’s site
as the former site of Mabini’s residence,
President Ferdinand Marcos issued the
Proclamation No. 234, s. 1967, naming
the bridge at Nagtahan Street, Manila, the
“Mabini Bridge” in memory of Apolinario
Mabini, the “Sublime Paralytic.” 141 However,
little notice was made of this, and in
time the name was forgotten. This year,
however, upon the recommendation of the

104

■ SAMP Alio C 1

'ANDACAN

PHOTO: YMCA’s 1934 map of Manila features the
topography of the area prior to the construction of
the Mabini Bridge. Photo courtesy of John Tewell.

PHOTO: Present Manila map of the same area.
Screenshot from Google Maps.

PHOTO: The Malacanan Park (lower left of the
image) was purchased and added to the Malacanan
complex during the Quezon Administration, 1936-
1937. In 1960, with the construction of the Nagtahan
Bridge (now Mabini Bridge) adjacent to this area,
to be finished in 1963, the Mabini House was moved
from the north bank at the foot of the bridge to
the south bank, within the Malacanang Compound.
Photo courtesy of Manuel L. Quezon III.

Presidential Communications Development
and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO)
as a fitting contribution to the Mabini
Sesquicentennial, the Department of Public
Works and Highways changed the pertinent
road signs to read Mabini Bridge.

II. THE MABINI SHRINE

PHOTO: The reconstructed house at the Nagtahan
Street where Mabini died. The structure is within
the Mabini Shrine in Pandacan. Photo courtesy of
National Historical Commission of the Philippines.

A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The bamboo-and-nipa house which would
later be known as the Mabini Shrine
belonged to the couple Cecilio del Rosario
and Maxima Castaneda-del Rosario [5] to
whom Apolinario Mabini was related by
affinity. (His younger brother married a del
Rosario daughter.)

The house was located in Nagtahan,
Pandacan, in Manila. Formerly known as

105

Pandanan, Pandacan was the neighborhood
where Francisco Balagtas settled down,
where Fr. Jacinto Zamora was born, and
where Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista and
Apolinario Mabini were neighbors. In
an ironic twist of events, Mabini would
later supplant Bautista as President Emilio
Aguinaldo’s Chief Adviser after he expressed
misgivings about the form and content of
the Proclamation of Independence read by
Bautista on June 12, 1898J 61

Mabini first lived in the del Rosario house in
1888, the year he entered the Faculty of Law
of the nearby University of Santo Tomas . P]

It was in this same house that Mabini’s friends
gathered on the day he was to be conferred
with his Licentiate degree in jurisprudence on
March 14, 1894. Mabini initially refused to
attend the ceremony because he didn’t have
a ceremonial gown. Fortunately, a gown was
donated to him by a client in Sta. Cruz to
whom Mabini offered legal assistance. Fie
was able to attend the graduation rites with
his friends. 181

Mabini continued to live in Pandacan until
October 10, 1896, when he was arrested by
a sergeant of the Civil Guard as asuspechosa
due to his connections with Rizal and La
Liga Filipina, and, later, with Cuerpo de
Compromisarios, the organization that
served as the mouthpiece of La Solidaridad
in the Philippines. Instead of a prison, he was
held in confinement at the San Juan de Dios
Hospital in Intramuros. [9]

Mabini was granted amnesty on May 17,
1897, and returned to the Pandacan house
until January 1898, when Mabini left Manila

for Laguna, he became a pamphleteer.! 101
In the end of May 1898, Mabini was invited
by President Aguinaldo to be an adviser for
the Revolutionary Government. Aguinaldo
was familiar with Mabini’s work positing
the organization of a formal revolutionary
government. 1111

Mabini became the Chief Adviser of President
Aguinaldo on June 12, 1898, but arrived
late to the ceremony of the Proclamation of
Independence. From the founding of the First
Republic on January 23, 1 899, Mabini resided
in Malolos, Bulacan, the First Republic’s seat
of power, as he headed Aguinaldo’s cabinet.
However, he soon resigned from the post on
May 4, 1899, giving way to Pedro Paterno [121

Mabini went to Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija and
was captured there by the American colonial
government on December 10, 1899. [13)
Mabini was then exiled to Guam in 1901.
Upon his return to the country on February
26, 1903, Mabini decided to reside again in
the same house in Pandacan with his brother.
He passed away on May 13, 1903, due to an
outbreak of cholera in the area.

B. RELOCATIONS OF THE MABINI SHRINE

The house was originally located at the foot
of the Nagtahan Bridge on the north bank
of the Pasig River. It was moved to the south
bank in 1960, into the Presidential Security
Group Compound in Malacanang Park 114 '
in order to give way for the widening of
Nagtahan (now Mabini) Bridged 151 Within
the compound, it was restored under the care
of National Artist for Architecture, Juan F.
Nakpild 161 On April 2007, the Metropolitan
Manila Development Authority (MMDA)

106

proposed that the Mabini Shrine be
relocated to a new site, as part of a
project to widen the river channel
in order to let the water in the Pasig
River flow unimpeded.

Meetings involving representatives
of the Metro Manila Development
Authority (MMDA), the Presidential
Security Group, and the National
Historical Institute (now the
National Historical Commission of
the Philippines), were conducted.
On August 6, 2007, the President
of the Polytechnic University of
the Philippines (PUP), Dr. Dante G.
Guevarra, successfully volunteered
the PUP Main Campus as the new
site. PUP allotted a 905-square-meter
site for the shrine, 1171 and renamed its
campus accordingly. With National
Historical Institute (NHI) Board
Resolution No. 01, s. 2008, the PUP
Mabini Campus became the third site
of the Mabini Shrined 181

In order to prevent another
movement that “may further diminish
its historical and architectural
authenticity and sanctity as a National
Shrine,” President Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo, through Proclamation No.
1992, s. 2010, declared the PUP
Mabini Campus to be the permanent
home of the Mabini Shrine.

On January 24, 2013, a year-long
project was kicked off, conducted
by R. A. Lacanlale Construction, to
restore the house and the surrounding
grounds! 191

PANDACAN

The neighborhood of Apolinario Mabini (and other notables)

During the time of Apolinario Mabini, the small town of Pandacan was
called “Little Venice,” because it was surrounded by clear-running estuaries
coming from the Pasig River. Writers noted the breathtaking scenery of the
town, full of “luxuriant flower and vegetable gardens, fertile rice and corn
fields.” Pandacan's signature plant, however, was the pandan, the
abundance of which gave the area its earlier name,

“Pandanan"— which Spaniards mispronounced into
what we call it today: “Pandacan."

Pandacan was a very cultural town, where many
of the budding playwrights, dramatists and
musicians of the 1800s lived. The poet Francisco
Balagtas lived and fell in love in Pandacan.

It was also a hotbed of nationalism. Tn the early years of

Spanish colonization, the area’s chief Pedro Balingit joined other Tagalog nobles of the
time and tried to wrest Manila back from the Spanish. Lorenzo de la Paz, one of the six
Katipuneros martyred in the early months of the Philippine Revolution, hailed from Pandacan.
Fr. Jacinto Zamora, Pandacan-born, was arrested there while serving as the town’s parish priest.
Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista, the staunch rival of Mabini and author of the Proclamation of
Independence, also resided there.

SIGNIFICANT PEOPLE WHO LIVED IN PANDACAN

(of GOMBURZA fame)

Lorenzo de la Paz, Catalino Manuel, Lazaro Eduardo, Felipe
Blanco, Angelo Bulong, and Severo Katok
Katipunan Martyrs

Ambrosio Rianzares
Bautista
Author

Miguel Masilungan,
Pantaleon Lopez
Zarzuela Playwrights

Bonifacio Abdon
Violinist

Dra. Paz Mendoza
Guanzon

First Filipina Doctor

Pandacan’s patron saint, Santo Nino Jesus, is said to avert fires.

It was in Pandacan that Apolinario Mabini chose to live in 1888, living
in the house of his brother. Agapito. The University of Santo Tomas,
from where Mabini would finish his law studies in 1894, was nearby. It
was in this house in Pandacan that Mabini would stay for most of his
life, even returning to it following his exile to Guam; it was in
this Pandacan house that Mabini, in 1903, died of cholera.

107

ENDNOTES

[1J Photographic evidence, February
1945, accessed March 10, 2016,
http ://correo sfilipinas . tumblr. com /
post/15 8 869801 34/nagtahan-bridge-
1945-during-liberation-of-manila.

[2] Manuel L. Quezon III et al., Malacahan

Palace: The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 204-205.

[3] G.R. No. L-21749, September 29, 1967.

[4] “Presidential Proclamation No. 234, s.

1967,” Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, July 22, 1967,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/1967/07/22/proclamation-no-
234-S-1967/.

[5] Mabini Shrine PUP Historical Marker,
inscribed by the National Historical
Commission of the Philippines.

[6] Luning Ira and Isagani Medina, Streets
of Manila /Manila: GCF Books, 1977),
217.

[7] Fidel Villaroel, Apolinario Mabini
- His Birth Date and Student Years
(Manila: National Historical Institute,
2002), 25.

[8] Ibid., 35.

[9] Cesar Majul, Apolinario Mabini:
Revolutionary (Manila: National
Historical Institute, 2004), 43.

[10J Ibid., 44-45.

[11] Ibid., 51.

[12] Apolinario Mabini, La Revolucion
Filipina Volume 1 (Manila: National
Historical Commission of the
Philippines, 2011), 278-280.

[13] Arnaldo Dumindin, “Dec. 10, 1899,
Apolinario Mabini is Captured,”
Philippine- American War, 1899-1902,

accessed March 10, 2016, http://
philippineamericanwar. webs .com/
mabiniiscapturedl899.htm.

[14] Ambeth Ocampo, “The house where
Mabini died,” Philippine Daily
Inquirer, July 23, 2008, accessed
March 26, 2014, http://opinion.
inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/
view/20080723-150089/The-house-
where-Mabini-died.

[15] Eric Zeruddo, “Making Museums:

The Development of Philippine
Museums from 1901-1998,” National
Commission for Culture and the Arts,
accessed March 26, 2014, http://
www.ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-
and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.

php ?igm=2&i=204

[16] Rio N. Araja, “Mabini Shrine falls to
clearing jon,” Manila Standard Today,
March 13, 2007, accessed March

26, 2014, https://groups.yahoo.com/
neo/groups/hcs-youth/conversations/
messages/554.

[17] Veronico Tarrayo et al., PUP and
Mabini: Fusion of Two Impregnable
Institutions (Manila: PUP Publications
Office, 2011), 34-37.

[18] “Presidential Proclamation 1992, s.
2010,” Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, February 8, 2010,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/2010/02/08/proclamation-no-
1922-S-2010/.

[19] “Memorandum of Agreement between
NHCP and R.A. Lacanlale,” National
Historical Commission of the
Philippines, January 24, 2013, accessed
March 26, 2014, http://nhcp.gov.ph/
wp -content/uploads/201 3/04053-moa-
lacanlale-mabini-PUP.pdf

108

Araw mg

.Republikamg Filipino

MARK BLANCO

[This essay was originally published on the Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines
website to commemorate the 114th anniversary of the First Philippine Republic, January 23, 2013]

January 23, 2013 marked the 114th
Anniversary of the First Republic of the
Philippines that was inaugurated in Malolos,
Bulacan. It also marked the anniversary of the
start of the Presidency of Emilio Aguinaldo,
the first President of the Philippines. The
Malolos Republic was the culmination of
the Philippine Revolution, which began
with the Katipunan and led to the creation
of the First Constitution and Republican
Government of Asia. To commemorate this,
President Benigno S. Aquino III, by virtue
of Proclamation No. 533, s. 2013, declared
January 23 of every year as “Araw ng
Republikang Filipino, 1899.” [11

PHOTO: Seal of
the Katipunan. The
initials read as such:
Kataastaasang
Kagalanggalangang
Katipunan Ng Mga Anak
Ng Bayan. Photo courtesy
of the Presidential
Communications
Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

The First Republic traces its origins to the
Revolution of 1896, which began under the
leadership of the Katipunan, a secret society

with a structure patterned after Freemasonry,
and which aimed to attain independence for
the Philippines. It was led by the President of
the Supreme Council; the most well-known
of whom was Andres Bonifacio. 121 The
Katipunan had members in Manila and other
provinces in the Philippines. Due to political
and other differences between the members
from Manila and other provinces, divisions
arose in the organization, prompting its
leaders to call for a convention to try and

PHOTO: Seal of
Aguinaldo’s Magdalo
faction of the Katipunan.
Photo courtesy of
the Presidential
Communications
Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

reunify the society.

On March 22, 1897 the Tejeros Convention
was held in order to reconcile the differences
between the two factions of the Katipunan: the
Magdalo, which viewed Emilio Aguinaldo y

109

Famy as its leader, and the Magdiwang, which
gravitated towards Andres Bonifacio. The
outcome was a decision that the Katipunan
should be dissolved and a revolutionary
government established. 131 Elections were
held for its officers: Emilio Aguinaldo was
elected President and Andres Bonifacio, the
former leader of the Katipunan, was elected
Director of the Interior. Initially, Bonifacio
accepted his position, but was insulted
when Daniel Tirona objected. Bonifacio
declared the proceedings of the Tejeros
Convention null and void and established a
new government. 141 This was seen as an act
of treason by the others and Bonifacio was
charged with refusing to recognize newly
established Revolutionary Government.
Tie was arrested and sentenced to death in
Maragondon, Cavite.

Biak-na-Bato. [61 The government established
was to be headed by a Supreme Council
composed of a President, Vice President,
and four Secretaries empowered to govern.
However, this plan never materialized
because Aguinaldo entered into negotiations
with the Spanish government. This resulted
in an agreement under which Philippine
Revolutionaries would go into exile in Hong
Kong and surrender their arms in exchange
for financial indemnities and pardons. The
Pact of Biak-na-Bato, as it would later be
called, was signed on December 15, 1897. 171
Aguinaldo and the revolutionaries departed
for Hong Kong on December 27, 1897. 181 In
Hong Kong, Aguinaldo and his companions
established a Junta, which worked toward
continuing the revolution and gaining
freedom from the Spaniards.

The Revolutionary government, led by
Aguinaldo, continued the revolution against
the Spaniards. At this point, the Spaniards
were of the impression that the revolution
was in decline and concentrated their efforts
on pursuing Aguinaldo and his companions.
By the latter part of 1897, Aguinaldo was
forced by advancing Spanish forces to retreat
to the mountains of Biak-na-Bato. 151

PHOTO: Seal of the Republic of
Biak-na-Bato. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic
Planning Office.

On November 1, 1897, Aguinaldo, along with
several revolutionaries, convened a citizen’s
assembly in order to draft a provisional
constitution for the Philippines, which has
come to be known as the Constitution of

With the outbreak of the Spanish-American
War, Aguinaldo, with members of the Hong
Kong Junta, returned to the Philippines
in the middle of 1898 to continue the
revolution. On May 28, 1898 the Philippine
Flag was unfurled for the first time at the
Battle of Alapan. 191 Philippine Independence
was formally proclaimed on June 12, 1898,
when Aguinaldo waved the flag in Kawit,
Cavite and was declared dictator. There, the
Philippine National Anthem was also played
for the first time. 1101

PHOTO: Seal of the Dictatorial
Government. Photo
courtesy of the Presidential
Communications Development
and Strategic Planning Office.

Six days after the Proclamation of
Independence, Aguinaldo issued a

proclamation formalizing the creation
of a dictatorial government responsible
for assessing the needs of the country.
The Dictatorial Government would last
for only five days. 1111 Upon the advice of
Apolinario Mabini, Aguinaldo issued a
subsequent proclamation 1121 abolishing it
and establishing a revolutionary government
instead. Aguinaldo’s title was changed from
Dictator to the President of the Revolutionary
Government and Captain-General of its army.
According to Mabini, this was done in order
to prevent other provinces from viewing
Aguinaldo’s dictatorial authority with
suspicion. The proclamation also created a
Revolutionary Congress to draft a constitution
for the government. 1131 On August 1, 1898, the
Proclamation of Independence was ratified by
provincial delegates in order to legitimize the
Revolutionary Government. 1141

PHOTO: Seal of the
Revolutionary Government.
Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic
Planning Office.

On September 15, 1898, the revolutionary
Congress was convened in Malolos, Bulacan,
tasked with drafting the constitution for the
Philippines. The Congress was composed
of both appointed and elected delegates
representing all provinces of the Philippines.
In the inaugural session of the Congress,
Aguinaldo spoke and congratulated the
delegates in his capacity as President of the
Revolutionary Government. One of its first
actions was to ratify the June 12, 1898
Proclamation of Independence yet again.
The Malolos Congress approved the draft

Constitution on November 29, 1898. 1151
It was returned by President Aguinaldo on
December 1, 1898 for amendments, which
were refused. President Aguinaldo finally
approved the draft constitution on December
23, 1898. It was formally adopted by the
Malolos Congress on January 20, 1899 and
promulgated by President Aguinaldo on
January 21, 1899.

PHOTO: Seal of
the First Republic.
Photo courtesy of
the Presidential
Communications
Development and
Strategic Planning
Office.

The constitution provided for three branches
of government; an Executive, headed by
the President and composed of department
secretaries; a Legislature, headed by a Prime
Minister and composed of delegates from
provinces of the Philippines; and a Judiciary,
headed by the President of the Supreme
Court and its Justices. The Congress, as
representatives of the different provinces
of the Philippines, then elected Aguinaldo
as President of the Philippines. He was
inaugurated on January 23, 1899 and on
the same date the First Republic of the
Philippines was formally established, with
the full attributes of a state: three branches
of government, a constitution, and territory
under the authority of a government with an
army.

Ill

ENDNOTES

[1J “Proclamation No. 533, s. 2013,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, January 9, 2013,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/2013/01/09/proclamation-no-
533-S-2013/.

[2] Jim Richardson, The Light of Liberty:

Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila University Press,
2013), 416.

[3] Ibid., 323-325.

[4] Ibid., 330-332.

[5] Pedro S. de Achutegui and Miguel A.
Bernad, Aguinaldo and the Revolution
of 1896: A Documentary History
(Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 1972), 434-439.

[6] Ibid., 457-467.

[7] Teodoro Agoncillo, Malolos: Crisis of

the Republic (Quezon City: University
of the Philippines Press, 1960), 45.

[8] Ibid., 40-41.

[9] Arnaldo Dumindin, “May 19,

1898: Emilio Aguinaldo Returns,”
Philippine- American War, 1899-
1902, accessed March 7, 2016, http://
philippineamericanwar. webs .com/
emilioaguinaldoreturns.htm.

[10] Christi-Anne Castro, Musical
Renderings of the Philippine Nation
(New York, NY: Oxford University
Press, Inc., 2011), 28-29.

[11] Sulpicio Guevara, ed., The Laws of
the First Philippine Republic (Manila:
National Historical Institute, 1994),
10 - 12 .

[12] Ibid., 35-40.

[13] Nicolas Zafra, “The Malolos
Congress,” in The Malolos Congress
(Manila: National Historical Institute,
1999), 16.

[14] The provinces of Mindoro, Tayabas,
Zambales, Pangasinan, Union and
Infanta were included in the certified
document of ratification but the
names of the municipal presidents in
these provinces were not indicated;
Presidential Communications and
Strategic Planning Office, “Ratification
of Philippine Independence,” August

1, 1898, http://pcdspo.gov.ph/
downloads/2012/06/06112012-
Ratification-of-Philippine-
Independence-by-the-Municipal-
Presidents-August- 1 - 1 8 98 .pdf .

[15] “...it was unanimously approved inside
and outside of Congress.” Epifanio de
los Santos, The Revolutionists (Manila:
National Historical Institute, 2009),

27.

112

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, JOSELITO ARCINAS, COLINE ESTHER CARDENO, FRANCIS
KRISTOFFER PASION, AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

L THE VISAYAS DURING THE
PHILIPPINE REVOLUTION

A. FIRST PHASE OF THE PHILIPPINE
REVOLUTION

Officially, the Philippine Revolution began
on August 23, 1896 (recent scholarship
suggests on August 24 [11[2] ) as a reaction
to Spanish abuse and oppression. The
Katipunan, the secret Filipino revolutionary
organization that aimed for independence
from Spain, was discovered by a Spanish
friar, Father Mariano Gil, on August 19,
that led to an open revolution against Spain.
The first eight provinces that joined the
revolution were Manila, Laguna, Cavite,
Batangas, Pampanga, Bulacan, Bataan, and
Nueva Ecija. These provinces were put under
martial law and under a state of war by the
Spanish Governor-General Ramon Blanco
on August 30, 1896. This was the first phase
of the revolution begun by the President of
the Katipunan, Andres Bonifacio.

Two Visayans, Francisco del Castillo of
Cebu and Candido Iban of Capiz, who
had been cane-cutters in Negros and pearl
divers in Australia, settled in Tondo and
met with Procopio Bonifacio, brother of
Andres Bonifacio. Procopio persuaded them
to join the Katipunan. 131 During the Holy
Week of 1895, del Castillo and Iban became
prominent in the organization as they were
invited by Andres Bonifacio to explore Mt.
Tapusi in San Mateo, Rizal to search for
hideouts in case of discovery and places to
conduct initiation rites.

Upon learning that the Katipunan required
a printing press for the revolutionary
newspaper, Kalayaan, del Castillo and Iban
donated 400 pesos of their winnings from
the Manila lottery for the acquisition of the
press. Kalayaan, the official organ of the
Katipunan founded and edited by Emilio
Jacinto through the help of Candido Iban
and Francisco del Castillo, hastened the
spread of the Philippine Revolution.

Andres Bonifacio, four months after the
breakout of the revolution, ordered Iban and
del Castillo to organize a Katipunan chapter
in the Visayas, specifically in Aklan. The
Visayan Katipuneros sailed to Aklan in late
December 1896, reaching Lagatic (presently
New Washington) in January 1897. The
Katipunan Chapter in the Visayas was divided
east (headed by Candido Iban) and west
(headed by Francisco del Castillo) of the Aklan
River, having been able to gather a thousand
members within two and a half months.

Having learned that the Spanish authorities
would send an expeditionary force to Capiz,
the Katipuneros led by General Francisco del
Castillo marched on Kalibo on March 17,
1897. In their advance, General Francisco
del Castillo was killed by a guardia civil.
The Katipuneros, without their leader, had
to abandon their planned advance. Two
days later, Spanish Colonel Ricardo Monet
offered amnesty to all Katipuneros in the
province. Of those who surrendered, nineteen
revolutionaries were detained as they were
mostly officers of the Katipunan and actively
participated in the revolutionary movement.
On March 23, 1897, they were lined up
against the wall and shot. Their bodies were
brought in the town plaza for the townspeople
to see. These Katipuneros were known as the
“Nineteen Martyrs of Aklan.”

Spanish oppression and the execution of the
martyrs of Aklan inspired the founding of the
revolutionary movement in Capiz in the same
month. Esteban Contreras, commanding
general of the Capiz Katipuneros, led his
men on the attack in Barrio Tanza del
Norte, Capiz on May 4, 1897, marking the
beginning of the revolution in Capiz. [5)

Meanwhile, on March 22, 1897 in Cavite,
the Tejeros Convention was held. The
convention was a gathering of Katipunan
leaders to elect from among the Katipuneros
(composed of the Magdiwang and Magdalo
groups) and thus abolish the Katipunan and
establish a Revolutionary Government.

Emilio Aguinaldo was elected president,
and Andres Bonifacio, the President of the
Katipunan, was relegated to the position of
Director of the Interior. When Bonifacio’s
election to the position was challenged,
Bonifacio declared the convention null and
void through a proclamation known as the
Acta de Tejeros. This led to Bonifacio’s arrest,
trial and execution on the charge of treason,
and Aguinaldo’s ascent to the leadership of
the revolution.

The new government, led by Aguinaldo,
continued the revolution against the
Spaniards. At this point, the Spaniards were
of the impression that the revolution was
in decline and concentrated their efforts on
pursuing Aguinaldo and his companions.
By the latter part of 1897, Aguinaldo was
forced by advancing Spanish forces to retreat
to the mountains of Biak-na-Bato, Bulacan,
where he established the headquarters of his
government. A peace agreement was finally
settled through the Pact of Biak-na-Bato
with the Spanish authorities. The pact was
signed on December 16, 1897, agreeing for
the revolutionary leaders to go into exile in
Hong Kong and surrendering their arms in
exchange for reforms, financial indemnities,
and pardons. Aguinaldo and his companions
departed for Hong Kong on December 24,
1897.

114

The pact put an end to the conflict
temporarily. The hope that reforms would
be implemented by Spain went unfulfilled
since neither side was willing to abandon
armed conflict but were just biding time
and resources. The Spanish administration
did not implement the reforms the Filipinos
demanded such as the secularization of the
clergy and Filipino representation in the
Spanish Cortes.

In February 1898, even as General Aguinaldo
was in exile in Hong Kong, in Cebu,
Katipunero leader Francisco Llamas mounted
a revolt and created a revolutionary committee
with members composed of himself, Candido
Padilla, Catalino Fernandez, and Luis
Flores. M The revolutionary forces was led
by Pantaleon Villegas (also known as Leon
Kilat) and received broad popular support.
The initial fight was hand-to-hand combat in
Colon street, Cebu City when members of the
guardia civil were attacked by revolutionaries.
[7] He was eventually assassinated.

In March 1898, at Molo, Iloilo, a group
of prominent Ilonggos [SI headed by lawyer
Francisco Villanueva, lawyer Ramon
Avancena and Jose Tionko, [9] founded
the Comite Conspirador in preparation
for the revolution in Iloilo. 1101 The group
became the forerunner of the revolutionary
movement in the island of Panayd 111 The
Comite Conspirador communicated with
the revolutionary leaders from the different
provinces of the island and sought military
aid from General Emilio Aguinaldo. [12) As
the movement gained support and expanded
due to its revolutionary cause, it became the
Comite Central Revolucionario de Visayas . [13]

B. SECOND PHASE OF THE PHILIPPINE
REVOLUTION

When the Spanish-American War broke out,
U.S. Commodore George Dewey in Hong
Kong enlisted the aid of General Aguinaldo
to resume the revolution. On May 19, 1898,
General Aguinaldo returned from exile with
the help of Commodore Dewey. This signalled
the second phase of the Philippine Revolution
from Cavite. General Aguinaldo issued a
proclamation on the same day for resumption
of the revolution against Spain. The following
day, in Cebu, a new revolutionary committee
was formed with Luis Flores as president,
recognizing General Aguinaldo as President
of the revolutionary government. [14J

On June 12, 1898, in Kawit, Cavite, the
Proclamation of Independence was issued, the
national flag and anthem solemnly presented
to the people, and a dictatorial government
led by General Aguinaldo established.

In July 1898, the conspiracy against the
Spanish government in the island of Panay
was discovered. Thus, in Iloilo, Pablo Araneta,
a doctor who became general-in-chief of the
revolutionary forces, organized committees
across the province, together with Roque
Lopez, secretary of war of the committee of
conspirators and Quintin Salas. [1SI

Meanwhile, the American and Filipino
troops had besieged Manila. Realizing the
hopeless situation of the Spanish troops had,
Spanish Governor General Fermin Jaudenes
arranged a negotiation with General Wesley
Merritt and Commodore George Dewey,
without the Filipino forces’ knowledge. This
arrangement was meant to spare the Spanish

115

the humiliation of surrendering to Filipinos
and deny the Walled City to the Filipinos
so that the Americans could have it. The
result was the staging of the “Mock Battle
of Manila.” Thus, on August 13, 1898, the
Spaniards raised the white flag of surrender,
and in a ceremony in San Agustin Church,
Governor General Jaudenes handed over
Manila to the Americans. 1161

With the capture of the Spanish governor-
general, a new Governor General, Diego
de los Rios was appointed. The Spanish
administration established a new seat of power
in the city of Iloilo, becoming the last Spanish
capital in the Philippines. It was also here,
at the hacienda of Captain Sabas Solinap in
Santa Barbara, Iloilo, that the Comite Central
Revolncionario de Visayas agreed to launch
their revolution against Spain during the last
week of August 1898. 1171 This committee
became the temporary revolutionary
government in the Visayas. 1181

In Malolos, to strengthen the legitimacy
of the what was to be the First Republic
and to strengthen the Republic’s chance
of recognition by the family of nations,
General Aguinaldo decreed on September
4 and 10, 1898 the convening of a national
assembly, composed of appointed and
elected representatives from all over the
archipelago. This assembly, known as the
Malolos Congress, convened on September
15, 1898. The first purpose of the congress
was to re-ratify again the Proclamation of
Independence, which had been ratified on
August 1, 1898 by a gathering of provincial
representatives upon the insistence of
Apolinario Mabini (in this ratification, there
were no representatives at all from the Visayas

PHOTO: Major Generals Wesley Merritt (6th from
Right) and Elwell S. Otis (4th from Right), and
their staffs in front of Malacanan Palace, San
Miguel district, Manila. Photo taken from Cornejo’s
Commonwealth of Directory of the Philippines.

and Mindanao). 1191 The second purpose was
to frame a constitution for the new Republic,
known as the Malolos Constitution.

On September 6, 1898, General Emilio
Aguinaldo sent General Leandro Fullon
(from Antique who had been studying in
Manila when the revolution broke out),
commanding general of the Filipino forces
in the Visayas, to Pandan, Antique (presently
Inayawan, Libertad, Antique) to establish
control in Panay. Fie was accompanied by
General Ananias Diokno, who was sent
to Capiz. 1201 General Fullon and his troops
arrived in Pandan on September 21. Upon
reaching the province of Antique, General
Fullon’s forces occupied the towns of
Pandan, Culasi and Valderrama. By October,
1898, only the city of San Jose de Buenavista
remained in Spanish control. 1211

Meanwhile, Spanish loyalists had formed a
Filipino volunteer militia in Iloilo. On October
28, 1898, the militia, led by Martin Delgado
turned against the colonizers and decided to
join the revolution against Spain. 1221 At the
same time, the revolutionaries commenced
simultaneous uprisings in the towns of

116

Santa Barbara, Pototan, Barotac Nuevo,
Dumangas, Dingle and Duenas! 231

On November 17, 1898, at the plaza of Santa
Barbara, Iloilo, a Provisional Revolutionary
Government of the District of Visayas was
inaugurated! 241 The provisional government
was headed by elected President Roque
Lopez, 12511261 and was created as a political
subdivision of the Malolos government! 271
This was the result of the steps taken to
organize a movement led by Pablo Araneta,
general chief of the revolutionary forces.

In this inauguration, the Philippine flag was
raised by General Martin Delgado, marking
the first time the national flag was hoisted
outside of Luzon. It was sewn by Patrocinio
Gamboa, a revolutionary member of the
Comite Central Revolucionario de Visayas,
patterned after the national flag created by
Marcela Agoncillo. “Tia Patron” was also in
charge of the perilous task of crossing enemy
lines to deliver the national flag from Jaro to
Santa Barbara! 281 As the flag reached the top
of the pole, the plaza was filled with the cries
of “;Fuera Espana! ;Viva Filipinas! ;Viva
Independencia!” The band accompanied
the inauguration with Marcha Libertador,
a hymn for the revolution composed by
Posidio Delgado, brother of General Martin
Delgado. This event was to be known as the
“Cry of Santa Barbara.”

The Spaniards surrendered the town of Jaro
to Filipinos on November 21, 1898! 291 At the
time, Jaro was a separate town from Iloilo.
They were joined on July 16, 1937.

On November 18, 1898, U.S. Commodore
George Dewey reported that with the

PHOTO: Before the Philippine-American War
broke out. General Leandro Fullon was appointed
by Emilio Aguinaldo as commanding general of
all Filipino forces in the Visayas. On September 6,
1898 he left Cavite as the head of an expeditionary
force to Panay Island. He was from Hamtik, Antique
and had been a student in Colegio de San Juan de
Letran when the Philippine Revolution began. Photo
courtesy of Arnaldo Dumindin.

117

exception of Iloilo, the entire island of Panay
was already in the hands of revolutionaries.
On December 14, 1898, General Otis asked
President McKinley for authority to land
troops in Iloilo. On December 23, 1898,
McKinley sent the following instructions:
“Send necessary troops to Iloilo to preserve
the peace and protect life and property. It
is most important that there should be no
conflict with the insurgents. Be conciliatory
but firm.” 1301

President McKinley believed his instructions
to be so urgent that he had it cabled in full
on December 27. These instructions would
go down in history as “the Benevolent
Assimilation Proclamation” and serve as the
foundation of American policy in the conquest
of the Philippines. This was at a period when
the Treaty of Paris had not yet been ratified by
the U.S. Senate (a vote that would take place
on February 6, 1899, days after the outbreak
of the Philippine-American War).

Even ahead of the receipt of McKinley’s
instructions, General Otis had already
dispatched General Marcus P. Miller on

December 26, 1898 to go to Iloilo where he
arrived on the 28th. By the time he arrived,
however, the Spanish had already left Iloilo
and turned it over to the revolutionaries.
At this point, the instructions of McKinley
had already been received (to avoid a clash
until the Treaty of Paris could be ratified).
And so Miller asked permission to land on
several occasions, all of which were refused,
the revolutionaries informing Miller that
they would do nothing without orders from
Aguinaldo “in cases affecting their Federal
Government.” [311 Thus, Miller was on standby
on the shores of Iloilo awaiting orders.

Meanwhile, in the south of Negros island,
on November 17, 1898, General Diego de la
Vina, commissioned by General Aguinaldo
as Brigadier General of the Liberation Army
( General de Brigada, Comandante del Ejercito
Filipino, Provincia de Negros Oriental) and

118

his forces marched to Dumaguete to liberate
the towns of Negros Oriental and persuaded
the residents to join the revolution. By then
the Spanish forces had already evacuated to
Cebu. [32]

On November 22, 1898, in Antique, Panay,
General Leandro Fullon launched an attack
at the city of San Jose de Buenavista resulting
in a victory of the revolutionaries. The
Revolutionary Government of Antique was
established immediately after the Filipino
forces occupied the city. The remaining
Spanish forces fled to province of Iloilo. 1331

In Panay, by the end of November 1898,
General Martin Delgado, as General en
Jefe [34] and his Ejercito Libertador, the
liberation army, was victorious in liberating
all the towns of the province of Iloilo except
Jaro, Molo, La Paz and the City of Iloilo
which remained under Spanish control.

Originally, the Visayan leaders proposed
a federal union as suitable to a nation of
islands. To foster this, on December 2, 1898,
the Federal State of the Visayas 1351 (Estado
Federal de Bisayas) which was formed in
Iloilo from the merger of the Cantonal
Government of Negros (led by Negros
Occidental) 1361 , the Cantonal Government
of Bohol, and the Provisional Government
of the District of Visayas in Panay (which
included Romblon). The government was
patterned after American federalism and
Swiss confederacy. 1371

The Federal State of the Visayas organized its
Council of State composed of the following
members: 1381

OFFICIAL

POSITION

Roque Lopez

President of the
Council of State

Vicente Franco

Vice President

Jovito Yusay
Ramon Avancena
Julio Hernandez
Magdaleno Javellana

Councilors for
Iloilo

Martin Delgado
Pablo Araneta

Members ex-officio
from the Army

Fernando Salas

Councilor for Cebu

Agustin Montilla
Juan de Leon

Councilors for
Negros Occidental

Juan Carballa

Councilor for
Negros Oriental

Vicente Gella

Councilor for
Antique

Venancio

Concepcion

Councilor for Capiz

Numeriano

Villalobos

Councilor for
the District of La
Concepcion (now
absorbed by Iloilo)

Francisco Villanueva

General Secretary
of the Council of
State

Florencio Tarrosa

Vice Secretary

On December 24, 1898, 1391 the last Spanish
Governor General of the Philippines, Diego
de los Rios evacuated and surrendered the
city of Iloilo to the Filipinos. Spanish troops,
private citizens and public officials moved to
Zamboanga in preparation for their return
to Spain. On December 25, 1898, Filipinos
assembled at the plaza of the city of Iloilo,
now known as Plaza Libertad, and hoisted
the Philippine Flag for the second time
symbolizing the liberation of Iloilo from the

119

PHOTO: Diego de los Rios y Nicolau, was the last
Spanish Governor-General of the Philippines. He
became Governor-General on August 13, 1898, with
the capital at Iloilo City, Panay, after Governor-
General Fermin Jaudenes surrendered at Manila.

His term ended on December 10, 1898 when the
1898 Treaty of Paris was signed. Photo courtesy of
Arnaldo Dumindin.

Spanish Colonial Government and the end of
the Spanish rule in the island of Panayd 401

In Cebu, on December 24, 1898, Spanish rule
also came to an end, as the Spanish flag was
lowered at Fort San Pedro. Spanish Governor
Adolfo Montero turned over the government
peacefully to the transitional governor, a
Cebuano leader named Pablo Mejia. Mejia
met with Luis Flores, Katipunero and
member of Cebu Ayuntamiento, and Arcadio
Maxilom, leader of Cebu’s Katipunan chapter,
to discuss the turnover of the government to
the army of the First Republic. By December
29, the Philippine Republic was publicly
proclaimed in Cebu City and celebrated with
festivities. Luis Flores was elected leader of
Cebu, and by January 24, 1899, President

Aguinaldo approves the constitution of
the provincial council of Cebu under the
presidency of Luis Flores, “until such time
as the elections are verified in the manner
prescribed by the Decree of 18 June 1898,
and the permanent council is constituted
and representatives from the province in the
National Assembly are elected.” 1411 This was
partially in response to Cebuano feelings that
their representative in the Federal State of the
Visayas had been appointed.

II. VISAYAS UNDER THE FIRST
REPUBLIC

On December 30, 1898, President Roque
Lopez of the Federal State of the Visayas
sent a letter to General Marcus P. Miller,
in command of the American warships on
standby, insisting to land in Iloilo. The letter
stated:

“Upon the return of your commissioners last
night, we ... discussed the situation and the
attitude of this region of the Bisayas in regard
to its relations and dependence upon the
central government of Luzon (the Aguinaldo
government, of course); and ... I have the
honor to notify you that, in conjunction with
the people, the army, and the committee, we
insist upon our pretension not to consent ...
to any foreign interference without express
orders from the central government of Luzon
... with which we are one in ideas, as we have
been until now in sacrifices. ... If you insist ...
upon disembarking your forces, this is our
final attitude. May God forgive you, etc.

Iloilo, December 30, 1898 [42] ”

120

On January 1, 1899, the American

general provided a copy of the Benevolent
Assimilation Proclamation to the Federal
State of the Visayas; still, the state denied
him permission to land; in fact on January
5, two boat crews of the 51st Iowa tried
to land, but were told to leave. Harper’s
Weekly correspondent J. F. Bass wrote “So
here we are at Iloilo, an exploded bluff.” 1431
On January 9, President McKinley cabled
Otis to reiterate that there should be no
clash in Iloilo. On the same day, President
Lopez of the Federal State of Visayas sent the
following message:

“General: we have the high honor of having
received your message, dated January 1st, of
this year, enclosing letter of President McKinley.
You say in one clause of your message: 'As
indicated in the President’s cablegram, under
these conditions the inhabitants of the island
of Panay ought to obey the political authority
of the United States, and they will incur a
grave responsibility if, after deliberating, they
decide to resist said authority.’ So the council
of state of this region of Visayas are, at this
present moment, between the authority of the
United States, that you try to impose on us,
and the authority of the central government
of Malolos. ... The supposed authority of the
United States began with the Treaty of Paris,
on the 10th of December, 1898. The authority
of the Central Government of Malolos is
founded in the sacred and natural bonds of
blood, language, uses, customs, ideas, (and)
sacrifices.” 1443

On January 11, Acting Assistant Surgeon
Henry DuR. Phelan was sent by Miller
to negotiate with the Federal State of
Visayas. Attorney Raymundo Melliza

(future Governor of Iloilo) rejected the
American argument that they only wanted
to temporarily land in Iloilo. Phelan quoted
the committee as saying “We have fought
for independence and feel that we have the
power of governing and need no assistance.
We are showing it now. You might inquire
of the foreigners if it is not so.” 1451 Melliza
stated that “their orders were not to allow
[the Americans] to disembark, and that
they were powerless to allow [them] to
come in without express orders from their
government.” 1461 Finally Phelan threatened to
destroy Iloilo, to which Melliza replied “that
he cared nothing about the city; that [the
Americans] could destroy it they wished.” 1471
Melliza added, “We will withdraw to the
mountains and repeat the North American
Indian warfare. You must not forget that.” 1481

Meanwhile, on December 31, 1898, General
Emilio Aguinaldo appointed General Vicente
Lukban from Camarines Norte as military
governor of Samar and Leyte 1491 and sent him
to Catbalogan, Samar. He soon organized the
military in Samar. Their base operation was
situated in the mountains of Matuguinao,
Samar. Around the same time, in Leyte, the
Filipino forces were organized under General
Ambrosio Mojica, military governor in Leyte
who succeeded General Lukban. Due to
insufficient arms, the revolutionaries engage
in guerilla warfare.

Finally, on January 23, 1899, in Malolos,
Bulacan, the First Republic of the Philippines
was inaugurated and formally established in
Malolos, with the full attributes of a state:
three branches of government, a constitution,
and territory under the authority of a
government with an army. Emilio Aguinaldo

121

was then inaugurated as President on the
same day.

As the new republic built its government
bureaucracy, many of the Visayan leaders had
reservations over the authority of the Malolos
government. The Federal State of the Visayas
proclaimed loyalty to the republic but kept
their own government, collected their own
taxes and maintained their own army. 1501
Moreover, Negros Occidental was concerned
with the stability of their ownership of their
sugar interests. It was Apolinario Mabini,
prime minister of the Republic, who urged
the newly formed Federal State of the
Visayas in a letter dated January 24, 1899, to
hold an election of representatives, clarifying
that the ratified Malolos Constitution was
only provisional until elected representatives
of Visayas and Mindanao could ratify it (as
nearly all Visayan representatives were not
only appointed, but were non-Visayan). 151]

But by this point, tensions were growing
between the Philippine and American
forces. On February 4, 1899, the Philippine-
American War broke out. In Manila, the
Americans attacked on all fronts, having
gained firepower and more reinforcements.
As offensives were undertaken in Manila,
American troops also attacked the Visayas.
On the 11th of February, days after
the outbreak of war, American troops
commanded by Brigadier General Marcus
Miller invaded the City of Iloilo causing
the Filipino forces led by General Martin
Delgado and Teresa Magbanua to retreat. [S2]

The American offensive in Iloilo led to the
fall of the city of Iloilo on February 11, 1899
followed by the towns of Santa Barbara,
Oton, Mandurriao and Jaro. [S3]

PHOTO: Teresa “Nay Isa” Magbanua y Ferraris
(1868-1947), the female Visayan revolutionary
leader, joined the Filipino revolutionary forces at
the age of 28. She was a classmate of First Lady
Aurora Aragon Quezon in their younger days. She
had a rare distinction of having fought all of the
Philippines’ colonizers: Spanish, American and
Japanese. Photo courtesy of Arnaldo Dumindin.

In the third week of February, the American
ship Petrel anchored in Cebu and its
commander demanded to surrender the
city. The representatives of the provincial
council of Cebu decided to surrender the
city but Arcadio Maxilom, commander of
the Katipunan in Cebu, refused to accept
American sovereignty and established
himself as supreme military commander of
the Cebuano forces. They received financial
support from the Malolos government only
until May of that year. 1541

By the middle of 1899, Cebuanos appealed
to the Schurman Commission by submitting
a memorial, signed by prominent citizens.
The memorial proclaimed:

122

"Believing themselves to be the faithful
spokesmen of the aspirations of the town
of Cebu, they beg that you make known to
the Government of your country that the
inhabitants of the island of Cebu, like those
of the rest of the Philippines, desire the
independence of their country; that they have
the same ideal just as they have a common
flag. Having the pleasure of expressing to
you once more our sacred ideals, we further
express to you that we gladly accept the
temporary protection of your country, but as
to its sovereignty, never ." 1553

The memorial was largely ignored by the
Americans.

Meanwhile, in Panay, on April 27, 1899
American forces advanced to San Jose de
Buenavista in the province of Antique.
Realizing the strength of the American
troops, the Filipino forces shifted to guerrilla
warfare and conducted raids, skirmishes and
ambushes against the enemy. The next day,
to strengthen the Visayan defense of Panay
and frustrated by the refusal of the Federal
State of the Visayas to reorganize and
forward taxes, 1 [5S1 President Emilio Aguinaldo
abolished the Federal State, and appointed
General Martin Delgado as civil and military
governor of Iloilo. 1571

In Capiz, Filipino forces continued their
advance inflicting damages and casualties to
the remaining Spanish forces in the province
while anticipating American offensive coming
from Iloilo and Antique. On August 1899, the
Spanish Governor Herrera, representative of
the remaining Spanish resistance in Capiz,
surrendered to the Filipino forces led by
General Ananias Diokno in Baybay Beach. 1581

On January 18, 1900, due to the strength
of American navy, the province of Antique
finally succumbed to the Americans. Nine
days later, in Samar, an American warship
docked in Maqueda Bay taking U.S. Colonel
Arthur Murray ashore to negotiate and
demand the surrender General Vicente
Lukban. Catbalogan was heavily shelled and
bombarded by the Americans but General
Lukban had taken the entire population
to the hills. The Americans organized a
“pacification” campaign against General
Lukban and his forces but failed. On April
15, 1900, the Filipino forces of Samar won
against the 43rd U.S. Infantry.

A few months after, on September 28,
1901, in the town of Balangiga, Samar, as
the Company C of the 9th U.S. Infantry
Battalion occupied the town, Filipinos
rose up against the Americans, killing
36 soldiers and wounded 22 others. It
would be known by the Americans as the
Balangiga Massacre, considered as Samar’s
most “glorious achievement” during the
Philippine- American War. 1591 In retaliation,

123

the American forces led by U.S. Brigadier
General Jacob Smith, reduced Samar to a
“howling wilderness,” killing civilians over
ten years old. This led to a U.S. congressional
investigation and trial. 1601

In Cebu, resistance to the American advance
continued. On October 2, 1 900, the Cebuanos
sent another memorial, this time, to the
U.S. Congress, pleading to the American
Government to declare the Philippines
independent. The document was written by
Juan Climaco and signed by leaders of the
Filipino forces in Cebu, but was ignored. 1611

III. THE FALL OF THE FIRST
REPUBLIC IN THE VISAYAS

As the Filipino forces began suffering
numerous defeats in the hands of the
American troops and the Filipino supporters
of the revolution longed for peace, the
leaders of the forces eventually surrendered
to the Americans.

General Delgado surrendered to the
Americans on February 2, 1901 in Jaro,
Iloilo. He later became the first governor of
the province of Iloilo as he was appointed by
the Americans on April 11, 1901 (effective
May 1) serving until 1904. 1621

A month later, on March 22, 1901, General
Leandro Fullon and his men surrendered to
the American forces at Palma, Barbaza. On
April 15, 1901, he was appointed provincial
governor of Antique serving until his death
on October 16, 1904. 1631

Another Filipino Visayan general, General
Esteban Contreras of Capiz surrendered to

the Americans on March 23, 1901 marking
the end of the revolutionary movement in the
said province.

On that very same day, President Emilio
Aguinaldo was captured by the Americans
at Palanan, Isabela marking the capitulation
and end of the First Republic. 1641

IV. EPILOGUE

Visayan leaders eventually acknowledge
defeat but did not give up the dream of
independence. They accepted and held
positions under the new system established
by the Americans but many Visayans become
prominent in the peaceful campaign for
independence.

Revolutionary leaders who accepted and ran
for provincial posts in many cases did so on
a platform of continuing the independence
effort. An example was Jaime de Veyra,
who ran on such a platform in 1904 and
was finally elected in the next election. The
founders of Comite Conspirador, Ramon
Avancena and Francisco Villanueva, became

PHOTO: Former President Emilio Aguinaldo and
running mate Raymundo Melliza ran under the
National Socialist Party ticket for the presidential
and vice-presidential election in 1935.

124

Chief Justice and Senator (Majority Floor
Leader) respectively. Esteban de la Rama, a
delegate of Iloilo in the Malolos Congress,
later on served as Senator in 1941-1945
and 1946-1947J 651 Raymundo Melliza
became the Governor of Iloilo and the
running mate of Emilio Aguinaldo in the
Presidential Elections of 1935. General
Ananias Diokno, leader of the Filipino forces
in Capiz, is the great grandfather of National
Historical Commission of the Philippines
(NHCP) Chairperson Maria Serena Diokno.
Servillano Aquino, appointed delegate of the
province of Samar in the Malolos Congress,
is the great grandfather of President Benigno
S. Aquino III.

In the end, it was a Visayan, Sergio Osmena,
who on June 19, 1908, issued a new
Proclamation of Independence opening a
new chapter that would culminate on July
4, 1946, when the United States finally
recognized Philippine independence.

ENDNOTES

[1J Milagros C. Guerrero et ah,

“Balintawak: The Cry for a
Nationwide Revolution,” Sulyap
Kultura 2 (1996): 13-21, accessed May
26, 2014, http://www.ncca.gov.ph/
about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-
n-a/article.php?i=59.

[2] Jim Richardson, The Light of Liberty:

Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila University Press,
2013), 263.

[3] Demy P. Sonza and Adriano Hernandez,

A Hero in War and in Peace (Iloilo
City: Local History and Biography

Foundation, 2001), https://books.
google. com.ph/books?id=otFwAAAAM
AAJ&dq=candido+iban -t-capiz&focus
=searchwithinvolume&q=del+castillo.

[4] Bernardita R. Churchill et ah,

Resistance & Revolution: Philippine
Archipelago in Arms (Manila: National
Commission of Culture and the Arts,
2002), 144-152.

[5] Ibid., 175-184.

[6] “Evolution of the Revolution,”

Presidential Museum and Library,
accessed June 5, 2015, http://
malacanang.gov.ph/7824-evolution-of-
the-revolution/

[7] Manolo O. Vano, “The Cebuanos

Resistance to Western Dominion,” in
Resistance and Revolution: Philippine
Archipelago in Arms, ed. Bernardita
Churchill (1521 - 1902: History from
the Underside” (Manila: National
Commission for Culture and Arts,
2002), 37.

[8] Anita Feleo, Iloilo: A Rich and Noble

Land (Pasig City: Lopez Group
Foundation, 2007), accessed May
26, 2015, https://books.google.com.
ph/books ?id=Gc9xAA AAMAAJ&q=
comite+ conspirador+francisco+
villanueva&:dq=com ite+conspirador+
francisco+villanueva&hUen&sa
=X&ei=P_9 rVeq3HcXdmAX owIC4
Bg&ved=0 CCYQ6AEwAg.

[9] Celestina Boncan et al., The Filipino

Saga: History as Social Change
(Quezon City: New Day Publishers,
2000), accessed May 26, 2015, https://
books, google. com.ph/books?ei=P_9
rV eq3HcXdmAXowIC4Bg&id=7hdw
AAA AMAAJ&dq=comite+conspirador
+francisco+villanueva&focus=search

125

withinvolume&q=comite+conspirador.

[10] Philippine National Historical Society,
History from the People, Volume

6 (Manila: National Historical
Institute, 1998), accessed May 26,
2015, https://books.google.com.ph/
books ?ei=DPxrVaGqMMP ZmgW2v4
CoDQ&id=F B5wAAAAMAAJ&dq=
comite+conspirador +march+18%2C+
1898&focus=search withinvolume&
q=comite+ conspirador+.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Henry Funtecha et ah, The Struggle
against the Spaniards and the
Americans in Western Visayas: Papers
on the 1st and 2nd Conferences

on the West Visayan Phase of the
Philippine Revolution (Iloilo City:
University of the Philippines in the
Visayas Centennial Committee, 1998),
accessed May 26, 2015, https://
books. google. com.ph/ books ?ei=
DPxrVaGqMMPZmgW2v4
CoDQ&id= | P F x A A A A M A AJ &d q=
comite+conspirador +march+18%2C+
1898&focus=search withinvolume&:q=
comite+conspirador.

[13] Gregorio Zaide, The Philippine
Revolution (Manila: Modern Book
Company, 1968), https://books. google,
com.ph/books ?ei=aO 1 tVefeNKanmAW
Ph YKYAg&id=8nlCAAAAYAAJ&dq=
Comite+ Central+Revolucionario+de+
Visayas& focus=searchwithinvolume&:
q=Comite+Central+Revolucionario+
de+Visayas+under.

[14] Vano, “The Cebuanos Resistance to
Western Dominion,” 40.

[15] Maximo Kalaw, The Development of
Philippine Politics (Manila: Oriental
Commercial Company, 1927), 146.

[16] “Chronology of the Philippine Islands
and Guam in the Spanish-American
War,” Library of Congress, accessed
June 9, 2015, http://www.loc.gov/rr/
hispanic/1 898/chronphil.html.

[17] Elias Failagao, History of Miagao
(1716-1979) (Iloilo City: La Editorial
Incorporated, 1979), accessed June

9, 2015, https://books.google.com.ph/
books ?ei=alFtVaSBOYTl8gWtloHgAw
& i d = - h Zb A A A A I A AJ & d q = a ug u s t +
1898+comite+central+revolucionario+
de+visayas&focus=searchwithinvolume
&q=central+revolucionario+de+visayas.

[18] Felix Regalado et ah, History of
Panay, (Iloilo City: Central Philippine
University, 1973), accessed June 9,
2015, https://books.google.com.ph/
books ?id=IhVbAAAAIAAJ&:q=august+
1898+iloilo+santa+barbara&dq=
august+1 8 98+iloilo+santa+barbara8dil
=en&sa=X &ei=El5tVfDRAsHEmwXF
rYHo Dg&ved= 0CDAQ6AEwBA.

[19] Nicolas Zafra, “The Malolos
Congress,” The Malolos Congress
(Manila: National Historical Institute,
1999), 13-14.

[20] Kalaw, “The Development of Philippine
Politics,” 146.

[21] Churchill, ed., Resistance &

Revolution: Philippine Archipelago in
Arms, 157-164.

[22] Jose Manuel Velmonte, “Ethnicity and
the Revolution in Panay,” Kasarinlan
14, no. 1 (1998): 76, http://journals.
upd.edu. ph/index.php/kasarinlan/
article/viewFile/1 409/pdf_5 1 .

[23] “Historic Santa Barbara Church,”
National Historical Commission of
the Philippines, accessed June 4, 2015,
http://stabarbarachurch.nhcp.gov.ph/.

126

[24] Kalaw, “The Development of Philippine
Politics,” 146.

[25] Pedro Gagelonia, Philippine History
(Manila: National Bookstore
Incorporated, 1974), accessed June 9,
2015, https://books.google.com.ph/
books ?id=DkZwAAA AMAAJ & q=
Roque +Lopez+president&dq=Roque
+Lopez+ president8dil=en&sa=X&;ei=
faBuVaZA4HamgWH94DIAg&ved=
0CD8Q6AEwBw.

[26] Arnaldo Dumindin, “The War in the
Visayas,” The Philippine- American
War, 1899-1902, accessed June 4,

2015, http://philippineamericanwar.
webs.com/thewarinthevisayas.htm.

[27] Kalaw, “The Development of Philippine
Politics,” 147.

[28] National Historical Institute, Filipinos
in History Volume III (Manila:
National Historical Institute, 1996),
105-106

[29] Philippine National Historical Society,
History from the People.

[30] James H. Blount, American Occupation
of the Philippines 1898/1912 (Manila:
Solar Publishing Corporation, 1991),
146.

[31] Ibid., 153-154.

[32] Caridad Aldecoa Rodriguez,

“Negros Oriental and the Philippine
Revolution,” in Resistance &
Revolution: Philippine Archipelago
in Arms, ed. Bernardita Churchill
(Manila: National Commission of
Culture and the Arts, 2002), 61.

[33] Churchill, Resistance & Revolution,
157-164.

[34] National Centennial Commission,
Philippine Revolution: The Making
of a Nation-Papers from the Regional
Conferences held in Cebu City,

Davao City, Baguio City and Dapitan
City (Manila: National Centennial
Commission, 1999), accessed June 9,
2015, https://books.google.com.ph/
books?ei=H8 ZuVdiODaXNmwWV
24DAAg&id=E7ZaX NmwWV24D
AAg&id = E 7 Z w A A A A M A A J & d q = e j
%C3%A9rcito +libertador+martin+
delgado&:focus=search withinvolume&
q=general+en+jefe.

[35] Filomeno Aguilar Jr., “The Republic of
Negros,” Philippine Studies 48, No. 1,
(2000), 31.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Dumindin, “The War in the Visayas,”
http://philippineamericanwar.webs.
com/thewarinthevisayas.htm.

[38] Kalaw, “The Development of Philippine
Politics,” 147.

[39] United States War Department, Annual
Reports of the War Department
Volume 3 (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office), https://
books. google. com.ph/books?ei=Dspu
VfORAcfp8AXUwoDYBg8dd=zSTcdx
5YPQC&dq =december+24+1898+
molo %2C+iloilo+city+evacuated&:
focus=search withinvolume&:q=held+
until+December+24.

[40] “Historic Santa Barbara Church,”
http://stabarbarachurch.nhcp.gov.ph/.

[41] Resil B. Mojares, The War against
the Americans: Resistance and
Collaboration in Cebu, 1899-1906
(Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 1999), 10.

[42] Blount, American Occupation of the
Philippines, 154.

[43] Ibid., 157.

[44] Ibid., 157-158.

[45] Ibid., 160.

[46] Ibid.

127

[47] Ibid., 162.

[48] Ibid.

[49] Churchill, Resistance and Revolution, 94.

[50] Brian McAllister Linn, The Philippine
War 1899-1902 (Lawrence, KS:
University Press of Kansas, 2000), 65.

[51] ApolinarioMabini, La Revolucion
Filipina Vol. 1 (Manila: National
Historical Commission of the
Philippines, 2011), 251-253.

[52] Dumindin, “The War in the Visayas,”
http://philippineamericanwar.webs.
com/thewarinthevisayas.htm

[53] Ibid.

[54] Churchill, Resistance and Revolution, 53.

[55] Mojares, The War against the
Americans, 24-25.

[56] Linn, The Philippine War 1899-1901,
71.

[57] Dumindin, “The War in the Visayas,”
http://philippineamericanwar.webs.
com/thewarinthevisayas.htm

[58] Churchill, Resistance and Revolution,
184.

[59] Ibid., 100 -111.

[60] Arnaldo Dumindin, “Balangiga
Massacre,” The Philippine- American
War, 1899-1902, accessed June 4,

2015, http://philippineamericanwar.
webs.com/balangigamassacrel 901 .htm

[61] Mojares, The War against the
Americans, 25.

[62] Dumindin, “The War in the Visayas,”
http://philippineame ricanwar.webs.
com/thewarinthevisayas .htm

[63] Resistance and Revolution, 157-164.

[64] Arnaldo Dumindin, “Capture of
Aguinaldo,” The Philippine- American
War, 1899-1902, accessed June 4,

2015, http://philippineamericanwar.
webs.com/captureofaguinaldol 901 .htm

[65] “Esteban de la Rama,” Senate of the
Philippines, accessed on June 10, 2015,
http://www.senate.gov.ph/senators/
former_senators/esteban_de_la_rama.
htm

128

Inauguration of the
Commonwealth of t
Philippines

MARK BLANCO

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
78th anniversary of the Commonwealth of
the Philippines, November 15, 2013]

On November 15, 1935, the Filipino people
took the penultimate step to independence
with the inauguration of the Commonwealth
of the Philippines. 111 Only two months prior,
on September 16, a million Filipinos had
trooped to the polls to elect their two highest
officials — the President and Vice President.
This was the first time in the history of the
nation that a Filipino would finally sit as
Chief Executive and hold office in Malacanan
Palace. 121

Senate President Manuel L. Quezon and his
running mate Senate President pro tempore
Sergio Osmena were elected as President
and Vice President, while voters elected
representatives for the new unicameral
National Assembly and for local positions 131141

The Commonwealth was the culmination
of efforts to secure a definitive timetable

"mi-*

PHOTO: Inauguration of the Commonwealth
of the Philippines. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

for the withdrawal of American sovereignty
over the Philippines. Early on, at the start of
the American occupation, the United States
had established local governments with
local elected town and provincial officials.
Afterward came a gradual expansion of

129

national legislative representation, beginning
with the Philippine Assembly (or Lower
House) in 1907.®

It was not until the Jones Law of 1916
that the pledge of eventual independence —
once Filipinos were ready for self-
governance — was made. The Jones Law led
to the creation of an all-Filipino legislature
composed of the Philippine Senate and
House of Representatives.® However, the
position of Chief Executive — the Governor
General — and what was considered the
most important cabinet portfolio — Public
Instruction (precursor to the Department
of Education) — were reserved for American
officials appointed by the President of the
United States. Half of the Philippine Supreme
Court was reserved for Americans as well. 171

Independence Missions from 1919 onwards
were periodically sent to the U.S. Congress
and the White House to lobby for and
negotiate independence. In 1931, the
Osmena-Roxas (OsRox) Mission successfully
lobbied for the enactment of the Hare-
Hawes-Cutting Act, which was passed over
President Herbert Hoover’s veto in 1932.
This was, however, rejected by the Philippine
Legislature. In 1934, a new mission made up
of Quezon, Benigno Aquino Sr., and Rafael
Alunan (QuAquAl) negotiated the Tydings-
McDuffie or the Philippine Independence
Act, which set a ten-year transition period
to be known as the Commonwealth of the
Philippines, followed by the recognition of
the independence of the Philippines by the
United States.®

The Tydings-McDuffie Act established the
parameters for the preparatory period. Some

powers of supervision were reserved to the
United States, as well as foreign diplomacy
and currency. In all other respects, the
Philippines became self-governing.®

Among the provisions was the election
in 1934 of a Constitutional Convention
to draft the constitution of the incoming
commonwealth government. It was presided
over by Claro M. Recto with 202 elected
Filipino delegates who decided that the
constitution to be written would cover not
only the transitional Commonwealth, but
would apply to the Republic as well. The
convention finished its work on February
8, 1935 and submitted it to the President
of the United States for certification that
its provisions complied with the Philippine
Independence Act. It was certified on March
25, 1935 and it was subsequently ratified by
the Filipino people in a plebiscite on May 14,
1935. |10]

Aside from the certification by the President
of the United States of the draft constitution
for the Commonwealth of the Philippines,
the United States government also reserved
certain powers: currency, coinage, imports,
exports, and immigration laws would require
the approval of the President of the United
States. The United States could also intervene
in the processes of the Commonwealth of the
Philippines via Proclamation by President of the
United States. All decisions of the courts of the
Philippines were also subject to review by the
Supreme Court of the United States. However,
these powers were exercised rarely. 1 1111

The Constitution of the Commonwealth of
the Philippines provided for a presidential
system of government with a unicameral

130

legislature. It had the power to enact laws for
the Philippines, known as Commonwealth
Acts, through the National Assembly. 1121

The Commonwealth was meant to lay
down the foundations for an independent,
fully-functional state. Its priorities could be
seen in the first laws enacted by the new
National Assembly in December 1935:
Commonwealth Act No. 1 established
the Philippine Army and a national
defense policy; Commonwealth Act No. 2
established the National Economic Council;
Commonwealth Act No. 3 created the Court
of Appeals. The 1935 Constitution was
amended in 1940 to permit the reelection of
the president and the vice president, to restore
the Senate and thus shift the legislature back
to the bicameral system, and to establish a
national electoral authority, the Commission
on Elections. The proposed amendments
were ratified in a plebiscite held on June 18,
1940. [13]

With war looming over the world following
German aggression in Europe and the
Japanese annexation of Manchuria, the
National Assembly conferred emergency

PHOTO: Quezon and the Pacific War Council.
Photo courtesy of the National Library of Australia.

powers on the government. The Philippine
Army was placed under the command of
the United States Armed Forces Far East
(USAFFE), headed by Field Marshal Douglas
MacArthur, who was recalled to active
service after having served as military adviser
to the Commonwealth since 1935. 1141

Filipinos reelected Quezon, Osmena, and
legislators to fill seats in the newly created
bicameral congress on November 11, 1941.
War in Asia broke out on December 8,
1941 following the Japanese bombing of
Pearl Harbor, the American naval fortress
in Hawaii, and Axis military advances
throughout Southeast Asia. 1151

USAFFE, composed of Filipino and American
personnel, held off the Japanese war machine
that had routed the French, British, and
Dutch colonial governments in the region.
But lack of reinforcements, disease, and
obsolete armaments due to the “Europe First”
policy adopted by U.S. President Franklin D.
Roosevelt hampered any real progress.

On December 24, 1941, President Quezon
and his war cabinet evacuated to the island
stronghold of Corregidor in Manila Bay and
two months later left for Australia, en route
to the safety of the United States. There the
Commonwealth Government continued to
function in exile, gaining recognition from
the world community as a member of the
United Nations. President Quezon continued
to represent the Commonwealth of the
Philippines in Washington, D.C. He would
serve in the same capacity, with an extended
term in 1943 by virtue of Joint Resolution
No. 25 of the United States Congress, until
his death on August 1, 1944, resulting

131

in Osmena’s ascension to the Presidency.
Osmena gave his inaugural address in
Washington, D.C., making him the only
Philippine President thus far to deliver an
inaugural address outside the Philippines. 1161
On October 20, 1944, Allied forces under
the command of Field Marshal Douglas
MacArthur landed on the shores of Leyte and
began the campaign to liberate the Philippines.
He was accompanied by President Osmena,
whose return formally reestablished the
Commonwealth Government on Philippine
soil. With the nullification of all acts of
the Second Republic, President Osmena
convened the Congress, elected in November
11, 1941, on June 9, 1945. 1171

On April 23, 1946, the first postwar election
was held, in which Manuel Roxas and
Elpidio Quirino were elected President and
Vice President over re-electionist Osmena and
his running mate, Eulogio Rodriguez Sr. 1181
Roxas took his oath of office on May 28,

1946 as the third and last President of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines in front
of the ruins of the Legislative Building in
Manila. In the succeeding weeks, pursuant to
the provisions of the Philippine Independence
Act, the Commonwealth of the Philippines
became the Republic of the Philippines — the
Third Republic. 1191

Thus, on July 4, 1946, Roxas would again
take his oath as President, this time as
President of the newly-inaugurated and
independent Republic of the Philippines.
The Congress of the Commonwealth then
became the First Congress of the Republic,
and international recognition was finally
achieved as governments entered into treaties
with the new republic. 1201

Many of today’s institutions in our
government trace their origins to the
Commonwealth. These include:

• Executive Office (1935)

• Court of Appeals (1935)

• Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office

• Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (1936)

• National Bureau of Investigation (1936)

• Department of Budget and
Management (1936)

• Government Service Insurance System
(1936)

• Department of National Defense (1939)

• Department of Health (1940)

• New Bilibid Prisons (1940)

• Presidential Communications
Operations Office (from the
Department of Information and Public
Relations, 1943)

• Boy Scouts of the Philippines

• Girl Scouts of the Philippines

132

• National Food Authority

• National Economic Development
Authority (originally National Economic
Council, 1936)

• Bureau of Immigration and Deportation

• ROTC system

• Bureau of Aeronautics (1936 ;now
the Civil Aviation Authority of the
Philippines)

• Philippine Military Academy

• Philippine Air Force

• Articles of War (AFP)

• Comelec

• Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of
the Philippines

Chartered Cities:

• Cebu City (1937)

• Bacolod (1938)

• Quezon City (1939)

• Davao City (1936)

• Cavite City (1940)

• Iloilo City (1937)

• San Pablo City, Laguna (1940)

• Zamboanga City (1936)

Policies:

• All Filipino Supreme Court (1935)

• State of the Nation Address (1935)

• Minimum Daily Wage (1936)

• National Language (1939)

ENDNOTES

[1J Miguel Cornejo, Cornejo’s Pre-
War Encyclopedic Directory of the
Philippines: History and Government
(Manila: Miguel Cornejo, 1939), 416.

[2] Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Philippine Electoral
Almanac, rev. and exp. ed. (Manila:
PCDSPO, 2015), 54.

[3] Ibid., 55-56.

[4] Rolando Gripaldo Jr., “Manuel L.
Quezon: A Life led with achievement,”
The Technician 7, no. 1 (1998): 58-77.

[5] Cornejo, Pre-War Encyclopedic
Directory, 410-411.

[6] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 35.

[7] Cornejo, Pre-War Encyclopedic
Directory, 120-129.

[8] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 49.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Cornejo, Pre-War Encyclopedic
Directory, 329-341.

[11] Ibid.

[12] “The 1935 Constitution,” Official
Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed March 10, 2016,
http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/the-

1 93 5-constitution/.

[13] Cornejo, Pre-War Encyclopedic
Directory, A-13.

[14] Alfredo Saulo, Manuel Luis Quezon
on His Centenary /Manila: National
Science Development Board, 1978),
141.

[15] Ibid., 140-141.

[16] Ibid., 140-142.

[17] Ibid., 163.

[18] Lewis E. Gleeck Jr., The Third
Philippine Republic 1946-1972
(Manila: New Day Publishers, 1993),
53-54.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.

133

the Battle of Manila

JOSELITO ARCINAS, COLINE ESTHER CARDENO, AND FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
70th anniversary of the Battle of Manila,
February 2015]

The massacres committed by Imperial
Japanese troops on the civilian population
of Manila in February 1945 are among the
more horrifying tragedies of World War II in
the Pacific theater. Approximately 100,000
civilians in the City of Manila were killed
indiscriminately and deliberately. According
to the XIV Corps Inspector General’s report
on the Manila atrocities, the following war
crimes were committed: 111

• Bayoneting, shooting, and bombing of
unarmed civilians— men, women, and
children— with rifles, pistols, machine guns,
and grenades.

• Herding large numbers of civilians— men,
women, and children— into buildings,
barring the doors and windows, and
setting fire to the structures.

• Throwing grenades into dugouts, where
unarmed civilians were taking cover;

burying alive those who were not killed by
the grenades.

• Assembling men into large groups,
tying their hands, and then bayoneting,
beheading, or shooting them.

• Theft from civilians of money, valuables,
food, and the looting and burning of their
homes.

• Blindfolding and restraining Chinese and
Filipino men, and then beheading them
with a sabre on a chopping block.

• Torturing both military prisoners of war
and civilians by beating, kicking their
faces, burning, and making them assume
contorted positions for long periods of
time until they lost consciousness, to make
them reveal information.

• General disregard of the rights of prisoners
of war under the Geneva Convention.

• The taking of as many as a hundred girls
at a time by force to serve as “comfort
women” to Japanese troops.

• The killing of refugees, doctors, and nurses
at the Philippine Red Cross Headquarters,
disregarding the rights of the Red Cross
under the Geneva Convention.

134

With little or no reason at all, Japanese soldiers would shoot, bayonet, or throw hand grenades
at groups of helpless civilians. The streets were further fortified with minefields and pillboxes,
leaving many civilians no choice but to stay in their homes. For those who attempted to leave
or even cross the streets, the Japanese would mow them down with machine guns. Many
of these atrocities were mentioned in the War Crime Trials against the commanders of the
Imperial Japanese Forces.

“The enemy’s fury knew no bounds against those who defended the cause of our freedom. Being
a child, a woman or an old person was no deterrent to the bloody and murderous designs of the
barbarians of the Orient. Fortunately, all this has passed and I firmly believe that above these ruins
shall finally emerge the Filipino people, free and dynamic, who will work for their prosperity and
happiness, in complete peace and fraternity with all nations." 123

— President Sergio Osrneha, interview with Antonio Perez de Olaguer, published in El Noticiero
Universal, Barcelona, Spain on June 22, 1946.

Listed below are documented locations of atrocities committed by the Japanese against
Manileno civilians during the Battle of Manila. It does not include sites where indiscriminate
Japanese sniping happened and sites of executions by the roaming death squads, both of
which took thousands of civilian lives.

DATE/SITE

CASUALTIES

ACCOUNTS

February 3, 1945:

115 civilians

“Civilians were herded into trucks. They were tied

Dy Pac Lumber Yard

(body count

and forced to wait. They were transferred into

Juan Luna and Morga
Streets, Tondo, Manila

done by the
Americans on
February 7,
1945)

small groups to the lumber yard where they were
bayoneted and shot.”

- Jose Custodio, military historian

February 4, 1945:
Unknown cigarette
factory, Manila

Approximately
44 civilians
from Dee
Cho Lumber
Company

“Japanese Soldiers tied fifty civilians. They were
bayoneted afterwards. Only 6 survived.”

- Report of the XIV Corp Inspector General’s Office™

135

Beginning February 6,
1945:

Fort Santiago,
Intramuros. Photo
courtesy of Life
Magazine.

February 8, 1945:

La Concordia College,
Calle Herran (now
Pedro Gil), Paco. Photo
courtesy of Mr. Manuel
Angelo Carreon.

Approximately

“We were surrounded and drenched with gasoline.

600 men

A few survived and escaped. 1 am one of those few

(according

survivors, not more than 50 in all out of more than

to National

3,000 men herded into Fort Santiago and, two days

Historical

later, massacred. They were bombarded by a cannon

Commission of

placed at a distance of a hundred meters from their

the Philippines

prison building. The Japanese had been clearing the

(NHCP)

decks of potential opponents during what seemed to

Historical Map);

be the inevitable battle for the Walled City.”

3,000 men
according to

- Dr. Antonio Gisbert, massacre survivor, as quoted

some survivor

by Richard Connaughton’s book The Battle for Manila

accounts

[ 4 ]

“When the American forces surveyed Fort Santiago
on February 23 and 24, 1945, they found four
hundred corpses who appeared to have died through
bayonet wounds, gunshots, and hunger. They also
found a stack of fifty dead bodies, their hands tied to
their backs. They further discovered more horrifying
images in every cell. For instance, they saw three
putrefied bodies. In another one, 58 tubercular
patients’ cadavers were piled together. Survivor’s
account narrated that these patients were fed with
insects and human urine. Fort Santiago serves as a
reminder of more than fifteen thousand heroes and
civilians who were entrapped in the walled city as a
result of Japanese ignominy.”

- Antonio Perez de Olaguer, El Terror Amarillo en
Filipinas [5]

“At 2:30 p.m, La Concordia came under fire from the
Japanese artillery based at the Paco Parish Church.
In the evening, the roof of La Concordia college main
building was blown off. Hundreds lay dead as they
were hit by shrapnels or falling debris. Those who
tried to flee the premises were shot by the Japanese
patrols.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [6]

Approximately

2,000

refugees,

casualties

unclear

136

Colorado Street, Ermita
(now Agoncillo Street,
Ermita). Photo courtesy
of Mr. John Tewell.

Elpidio "It was February 1945.... Quirino had gathered his

Quirino’s family wife and children about him on that fateful day of 9th
February 1945 in the family residence on Colorado
Street, Ermita, to plan their escape from the area.
It was four o’clock in the afternoon. The Japanese
had transformed the neighborhood into a holocaust
of fire and death. A barrage of shells hit the roof of
the Quirino residence. As the house burned, Elpidio
decided to escape with his family to the home of his
mother-in-law, Mrs. Concepcion Jimenez Syquia, on
the same street. In a desperate attempt to get out of
the hell-hole, Elpidio ordered his son, Tomas, to lead
the group. Doha Alicia cuddled her two daughters,
infant Fe and Norma. Another son, Armando,
carried the family valuables, including jewelry. All
the members of the family then dashed towards the
Syquia residence. Tomas and Victoria led the group.
Half-way across the street, four Japanese marines,
camouflaged with leaves, machine-gunned them.
Looking back, Tomas saw the bodies of his mother
and two sisters lifeless on the ground. Mrs. Quirino
died hugging Fe, while Norma lay dead beside her.
Armando tried to retrieve their dead bodies but was
stopped by the machine-gun fire.”

“Elpidio’s failure to join his family that night caused
him much anguish. The following day he was told of
Armando’s death. A bullet had hit the boy’s temple.
Tomas, wounded in the thigh, suffered from shock.
Quirino himself narrowly escaped from a Japanese
bayonet thrust and machine-gun fire. Only he, son
Tomas and daughter Victoria survived the massacre.”

- Salvador Lopez, President Elpidio Quirino’s
biographer

137

February 9, 1945:

St. Paul College Chapel,
Calle Herran (now
Pedro Gil Street). Photo
courtesy of Mr. Lou
Gopal.

Approximately
250 civilians
in the chapel;
600 civilians
in the entire
school

“At around 5 o’clock, family groups composed of
at least 1,000 people were brought to a large hall
in St. Paul’s college. Meanwhile, the Japanese were
passing around rice and wine and candies to the
refugees. Rosario Fernandez, one of the refugees,
was in the back of the crowd when she heard a loud
explosion followed by terrified screams. Witnesses
noted that the chandelier over the middle of the hall
was wrapped in in black cloth and was tied with a
rope. When the crowd had gathered in the middle to
partake the cases of rice wine and candies, someone
tugged on the rope and the chandelier fell to the
floor. Several were crushed and wounded in the
explosions. Others stampeded to the exit as the hall
burst into flames.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [7]

6 priests, an
acolyte and
unknown
number of
Chinese
residents

"The Japanese broke in at the establishment and tied
the residents to prevent them from escaping. The
victims were led near the bank of Estero de Balete
and were machine gunned and bayoneted.”

- Rolando de la Goza and Jesus Ma. Cevenna, from
the book, Vincentians in the Philippines™

February 9, 1945:
Vincentian Central
House, Calle San
Marcelino (now San
Marcelino Street near St.
Vincent de Paul Church).
Photo courtesy of Mr.
John Tewell.

138

Around 250
civilians
(according to
the XIV Corps
report)

“Three hundred Filipinos who took refuge in an open
garage were tied by Japanese soldiers and were shot.
About fifty of this group survived.”

- Report of the XIV Corp Inspector General’s Office™

On or about February 9,

1945: Unknown garage at
the Paco District, Manila.

Photo courtesy of Mr.

John Tewell,

Less than 10 “About seven thirty in the morning, a shell fell over

civilians the children’s dining hall of the asylum. It killed

and wounded many. Shortly afterwards, a sound of
gunfire was heard all over the hall. The chapel and the
rest of the offices were filled with thick smoke and
the roof was in flames.”

February 10, 1945: Asilo
de Looban, Paco, Manila.
Photo courtesy of Mr.
Lou Gopal.

February 10, 1945:
German Club, San
Luis Street (now T.M.
Kalaw Avenue near San
Marcelino St.). Photo
courtesy of Mr. Lou
Gopal.

Approximately
100 civilians; in
the vicinity of
the club, 1,500
civilians

“'Early morning, the German Club caught fire and
the refugees in the dugouts were choking from thick
smoke. Mr. Ohauss, the manager of the German Club,
was seen pleading the Japanese in behalf of the
refugees. A group of women with babies were also
seen kneeling before the Japanese to let them go.
But they were repulsed. The children were bayoneted,
babies were thrown away and women were abused
by the Japanese. Anyone who would run away was
shot.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [10]

139

February 10, 1945:
Don Pedro and
Concepcion Campos
Residence, 1462 Taft
Avenue

The Campos
family and
at least 120
refugees

“At 8 o’clock in the morning, a band of Japanese
knock at the door. Mrs. Campos and her daughter Pilar
opened the door and were immediately shot down.
The 120 refugees were then called out to go to the
garden. As the people walked out of the house, the
Japanese started firing at them. Mrs. Maria Campos-
Lopez, Mrs. Concepcion’s sister-in-law, was cooking
breakfast then when she saw a Japanese soldier
splashing alcohol all over the room, on the pieces
of furniture and on the drapes. Without a word, he
lit the room on fire. The people in the house dashed
for the exits but were greeted with machine gun fire
outside. Mrs. Lopez ran to the adjoining property and
survived. Later, she was joined by Pilar Campos who
was seriously wounded.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [ ™

February 10, 1945: Price
Residence, Colorado
corner California
Streets (now Agoncillo
and Escoda Streets
respectively).

Approximately “Massacring and killing without cause or trial of over
100 civilians one hundred men, women, and children, all unarmed
non-combatant civilians, wounding and attempting
to kill thirteen others, and wrongfully destroying
and burning of home of the Dr. Price Flouse, Ermita,
Manila.”

- U.S. Brig. Gen. Courtney Whitney, from The Case of
General Yamashita: A Memorandum 1123

65 civilians;
including
doctors,
nurses, and
German Jews

“A squad of Japanese entered the Philippine Red
Cross building and began to shoot and bayonet
everybody they found in the building. The Japanese
soldier fired two shots at Mr. M. Farolan as he hid
under his desk, but the bullets passed between his
feet. The soldier then shot a young mother with her
ten-day baby and the baby’s grandmother, Mrs. Juan
P. Juan."

February 10, 1945:

Philippine Red Cross

- Report of the XIV Corp Inspector General’s Office 1133

General Luna and Isaac
Peral Streets (now
General Luna Street
and U.N. Avenue,
respectively). Photo
courtesy of Mr. Lou
Gopal.

140

February 11, 1945:
Tabacalera Building,

Isaac Peral (now U.N.
Avenue), Manila. Photo
courtesy of the Philippine
Star.

February 12, 1945: Carlos
Perez Rubio Residence,
150 Vito Cruz Street
(now Pablo Ocampo
Street).

50 civilians "Killing without cause or trial forty-three unarmed

non-combatant civilians, and attempting to kill twelve
others, at the Tabacalera Cigar and Cigarette Factory
and The Shell Service Station, Ermita, Manila.”

-U.S. Brig. Gen. Courtney Whitney, from The Case of
General Yamashita: A Memorandum 1141

Approximately “At 10 o’clock in the morning, the Japanese entered
26 people the Perez-Rubio residence. They ordered Jose

Balboa, Don Carlo’s gatekeeper, to the main house.
With eight others, they were machine-gunned by
the Japanese. Balboa fell to the ground but was not
hit. He forced himself out the window and fell to
the ground. A Japanese saw him and slashed him
with a bayonet. He was hit but he was able to flee.
Florencio Homol, Don Carlo’s sister’s houseboy, was
asked to join 40 others in the Perez-Rubio’s garden.
The Japanese lined them up and divested them of
watches, rings, and other valuables. Afterwards, they
asked everyone to gather furniture, rug, and drapes
into the hall. They doused the pile with gasoline and
set it on fire. Everyone rushed to the exit but were
met with machine guns. Homol was able to dashed
away to safety.”

- Eyewitness account by Florencio Homol written by
Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [15]

141

41 civilians
comprised
of former
students,
residents and
16 Christian
Brothers

February 12, 1945:

De La Salle College,
Taft Avenue. Photo
courtesy of Corregidor
Then and Now.

“Shortly after lunch, a band of Japanese inspected De
La Salle College for they suspected that the premise
was a sniper’s nest. When they found nothing that
interest then, they grabbed Mateo, Anselmo Sudlan
and Panfilo Almodan outside of the building. Shortly
after, they returned inside and pushed the two
refugees into the hall. They were seriously wounded.
Afterwards, a large band of 20 Japanese stormed
through the gate. The Japanese commander yelled
and a rifle shot reverberated across the hall. Victoria
Cojuangco dashed from the cellar upon hearing
his son’s warning. She was toting her adopted son,
Ricardo, but they were still met with bayonets outside
the cellar door. Mrs. Cojuangco was mortally stricken
but survived. Her son Ricardo died.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [16]

“In another room, Servillano Aquino and his wife were
visiting Antonio Cojuangco Jr. who was recovering
from illness. Dr. Antonio Cojuangco was also in the
room. When they heard the screaming and gunshots
outside the room, they locked themselves in. Shortly
after, the Japanese were banging the door and they
didn’t have a choice but to open it. The Japanese
started with stabbing the nurse, Filomeno Inolin.
Dr. Cojuangco dashed to the chapel but a Japanese
sprang after him. Aquino lunged at one Japanese to
get hold of his rifle. But the Japanese was quicker,
and he was stabbed many times with a bayonet until
he passed out.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [17]

142

Early February, 1945:
Scottish Rite Temple, Taft
Avenue. Photo courtesy
of Mr. John Tewell.

February 14, 1945:
Ateneo College,
Composed of
Manila Observatory,
Auditorium, Gymnasium,
Laboratories, Industrial
Engineering, and Library,
Calle Padre Faura (now
Padre Faura Street).
Photo courtesy of
Manuel Angelo Carreon.

February 18, 1945:
Moreta Flouse,

Isaac Peral Street (now
U.N. Avenue). Photo
courtesy of Lou Gopal.

Unknown " ... more than one hundred people executed at the

number of Masonic Temple.”

civilians

- Roderick Flail, from his memoir Manila Memories™

100 refugees; “Incendiary bombs were launched by the Japanese
composing of to set fire to the tower of the school. The fire in

men, women, the building created panic to the refugees, which

and children resulted to at least 100 deaths of men and women.

The children were crushed by the stampeding crowd.
In addition to the fire, the Japanese were also hurling
bombs into the building.”

- Antonio Perez de Olaguer, El Terror Amarillo en
Filipinas™

Around 40 “Japanese soldiers separated the men and women,

civilians The women were raped and those who resisted were

either bayoneted or shot. The Japanese soldiers
threw grenades to the men, killing them and burning
the Moreta residence.”

- Report of the XIV Corp Inspector General's Office [20]

143

February 19, 1945:
Palacio del Gobernador,
Palacio Real

PHOTO: Massacre site
on the lower right. Photo
courtesy of Nostalgia
Filipinas.

February 19, 1945: Front
of Manila Cathedral
Intramuros. Photo
courtesy of Mr. John
Tewell.

February 21, 1945: ROTC
Armory, sUniversity of
Manila

142 civilians,
comprised
of Filipino
and Spanish
residents

"The Japanese constructed two spacious caves,
fortified with concrete and massive wooden posts. At
least 125 persons were herded to the caves, including
Spanish civilians. At least 17 hostages were led to
the second cave. A Japanese soldier handed one of
them, Laurentino de Pablos, a jute sack tightly sewn
up from which wires ran out. De Pablos and Emilio
Canceller, another hostage, cut the wires when
the Japanese soldier demanded it back. Furious,
the Japanese started hurling grenades through
the caves' ventilation holes. From the outside, the
Japanese sealed the opening, thus, suffocating those
who survived the grenades.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War II

Around 125 “As they reached the front of the cathedral, they were
civilians, forced inside a large structure constructed of stout

including about timbers. The Japanese then lobbed hand grenades in
37 priests through the air holes.”

- Jose Custodio, military historian

Patients from
San Juan de
Dios Hospital
and Quezon
Institute

"This evening, another band of Japanese came upon
the tuberculosis patients. By the light of a torch
one of them held high, the Japanese bayoneted the
survivors one-by-one.”

- Alfonso Aluit, from the book By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War ll [2l]

144

ENDNOTES

[1J “Headquarters XIV Corps, Office of the
Inspector General,” Battle of Manila
Online, accessed March 11, 2016,
http://battleofmanila.org/IG_Report/
htm/IG_3 3 3_5_04 . htm.

[2] Antonio Perez de Olaguer and

Bernardita Reyes Churchill, Terror in
Manila (Manila: Memorare Manila
1945 Foundation, 2005), xv.

[3] “Headquarters XIV Corps Office of the

Inspector General.”

[4] Richard Connaughton, The Battle of

Manila (New York: Presidio Press,

2002).

[5] Antonio Perez de Olaguer and

Bernardita Reyes Churchill, Terror in
Manila, 180.

[6] Alfonso Aluit, By Sword and Fire: The

Destruction of Manila in World War II
3 February - 3 March 1945 (Makati:
Bookmark Incorporated, 1994), 208.

[7] Ibid., 221-224.

[8] Rolando S. de la Goza and Jesus

Maria Cavanna, Vincentians in the
Philippines (Makati:

Salesiana Publishers, 1985).

[9] “Headquarters XIV Corps Office of the

Inspector General.”

[10] Aluit, By Sword and Fire, 238.

[11] Ibid., 295.

[12] Courtney Whitney, “The Case of
General Yamashita: Memorandum for
the Record,” Battle of Manila Online,
accessed on February 2015, http://
battleofmanila . org/Whitney/cw_0 1 .htm.

[13] “Headquarters XIV Corps Office
of the Inspector General,” Battle of
Manila Online, acessed on March 15,
2016, http://battleofmanila.org/IG_
Report/htm/IG_333_5_01.htm.

[14] Courtney Whitney, “The Case of
General Yamashita: Memorandum for
the Record.”

[15] Aluit, By Sword and Fire, 287.

[16] Ibid. ,278.

[17] Ibid., 282-287.

[18] Roderick Hall, “Roderick Hall’s
Narrative,” Manila Memories: Four
Boys Remember Their Lives Before,
During and After the Japanese
Occupation, ed. Juergen R. Goldhagen
(Exeter: Old Guard Press, 2008).

[19] Antonio Perez de Olaguer and
Bernardita Reyes Churchill, Terror in
Manila, 197-198.

[20] “Headquarters XIV Corps Office of
the Inspector General.”

145

7 If 1o

Battle of Manila

PANCHO ALVAREZ, JEAN ARBOLEDA, AND MARK BLANCO

As American forces prepared to head to
Manila in January 1945, 111 Field Marshal
Douglas MacArthur hoped for the peaceful
handover of the city; he had, after all, in
December, 1941 proclaimed Manila an Open
City and withdrawn United States Armed
Forces in the Far East (USAFFE) troops. 121

American troops were given three major
objectives: 131 first, the liberation of the
University of Santo Tomas (UST), where
Allied civilians had been interned throughout
the Japanese Occupation; second, the seizure
of Malacanan Palace as it was the seat of
the presidency; and third, the reclamation
of the Legislative Building which housed
the Congress and was the site upon which
he hoped the Commonwealth would be
restored.

The American 1st Cavalry Division and the
37th Infantry Division were first deployed
to immediately liberate the internees held
by Japanese forces at UST. The 1st Cavalry
quickly and successfully captured UST
and Malacanan Palace and spared parts of
northern Manila from destruction. Their

liberation marked the beginning of the Battle
for Manila. 141

Recognizing this threat posed by the
Americans, the bulk of Japanese forces under
General Tomoyuki Yamashita withdrew to
Baguio City with the intention of holding
back U.S. and Filipino forces in Northern
Luzon. General Yamashita ordered that
the city be evacuated and that bridges be
destroyed at the sight of American troops.
151 However, Rear Admiral Iwabuchi Sanji,
fully aware of the ignominy of surrender
under the code of Bushido, opted instead to
defend the city to the death. The Japanese
fiercely defended their positions. They
destroyed bridges, notably those that crossed
the Pasig, to limit the mobility of the Allied
forces. Along with the bridges, part of the
Japanese strategy included having entire
rows of houses and buildings in the areas of
Escolta, Sta. Cruz, Quiapo, and Chinatown
set aflame. In them were ordinary civilians
who burned along with their homes. Fueled
by intense suspicion, the Japanese saw no
trouble gathering civilians — fathers, mothers
and children alike — bolting structures

146

TAYTAV

U.S. AXIS OF ADVANCE, DATES
INDICATED

NICHOLS

THE CAPTURE OF MANILA

THE ENCIRCLEMENT
3 - 12 FEBRUARY 1945

U.S. FRONT LINE, EVENING 7 FEB
U.S. FRONT LINE, EVENING 12 FEB

© Malacahan Palace 4j Manila Gas Works
© Malacahan Gardens ® Paco School
3) Provisor Island 6 ) Paco RR Station
T) Concordia College

MANILA

BAY

LAGUNA
DE BAY

PHOTO: A re-rendered US military map of the encirclement of Manila from Feb. 3 - 12, 1945. Photo rendered by
the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

shut and setting them ablaze. As the wind
carried the flames and hastened the spread
of fire, houses along Azcarraga were broken
down and transformed into firebreaks. The
ruination of Manila had begun.

Upon realizing that they were surrounded
and fearing the repercussions of surrender,
the Japanese occupied heavy concrete
buildings: the Post Office, Congress, Manila
City Hall, the University of the Philippines,
and edifices in Intramuros. They aspired to
keep their strongholds fortified against the
Allied forces . 161

In a move to protect the city and its
inhabitants, MacArthur strictly imposed

restrictions on U.S. air support and artillery.
But some still perished through friendly
fire and the destruction of some areas was
inevitable.

As defeat seemed imminent and facing
certain death and capture, the Japanese
exacted vengeance on Filipino civilians
caught in the crossfire and foreigners alike
whose death gave sense to the notion that
they could conquer their enemies. Filipinos
were brutally massacred — by machine guns,
bayonets, and katanas — but not without
the added torture of rape which our women
fell victim to. Fort Santiago, San Agustin
Church , 171 De La Salle College , 181 the German
Club , 191 San Juan de Dios Hospital , 1101 and the

147

Red Cross 1111 building were
all bloodstained; brothels
were erected, notably the
Bayview Hotel whose
chambers accommodated
Filipinas and expatriate
women alike. Their one
task was to wait in silence
and fear for their Japanese
captors to lay siege on them.
The Battle for Manila ended
on March 3, 1945, a month
following the arrival of
the 1st Cavalry Division.
100,000 Filipinos perished,
government buildings lay in
ruins — and Manila was Pearl
of the Orient no more. The
once illustrious city and the
Orient’s first cosmopolitan
hub that merged the East
and West now vanished
under piles of debris. [12]

PHOTO: The drive towards Intramuros. February 13-22, 1945. Photo
rendered by the Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

PHOTO: El iminating the last outposts of resistance. February 23 -
March 3, 1945. Photo rendered by the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

Following the end of the
Battle, General Yamashita
was tried and later found
guilty for the massacre of
countless Filipinos. He was
hung for War Crimes on
February 3, 1946 at Los
Banos, Laguna. Survivors
of the Battle felt intense
hatred for the Japanese
whose method of inflicting violence had
been both brutal and deeply personal. 1131
This sentiment was so great that even when
viewing their destroyed city of Manila, they
welcomed the destruction as the price they
had to pay for liberation. In this month-
long conflict, Filipinos lost invaluable

articulations of culture and their identity as
a people. Government buildings, universities
and colleges, churches, as well as other
institutional landmarks perished along
with all the valuables in their possession.
1141 Buildings suffered demolition to pave
the way for progress. This meant doing

148

away with European architecture in lieu of
the functional, American style architecture
that inspires some of our buildings today.
Only few among the original edifices would
remain intact. [15]

For the 68th anniversary of the Battle for
Manila, members of the group Memorare
Manila converged at the Plazuela de Santa
Isabel in Intramuros for a commemorative
ceremony. This group composed of several
survivors and their supporters, aims to keep
the memory of the 100,000 Filipinos who
perished during the Battle for Manila alive.
Through their leadership a monument was
erected on the 18th of February 1995.

The inscription reads:

"This memorial is dedicated to all those
innocent victims of war, many of whom went
nameless and unknown to a common grave,
or even never knew a grave at all, their bodies
having been consumed by fire or crushed to
dust beneath the rubble of ruins.”

“Let this monument be the gravestone for
each and every one of the over 100,000 men,
women, children and infants killed in Manila
during its battle of liberation, February 3 -
March 3, 1945. We have not forgotten them,
nor shall we ever forget."

“May they rest in peace as part now of the
sacred ground of this city: the Manila of our
affections.”

*AII images rendered by the Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO).

ENDNOTES

[1J Advance to Manila: After Action
Report of the XIV Corps - Ml
Operation,” Battle of Manila Online,
accessed March 14, 2016, http://
battleofmanila.org/XIV_CORPS_Ml_
OPERATION/htm/XIV_0 1 .htm.

[2] Alfonso Aluit, By Sword and Fire: The
Destruction of Manila in World War II
3 February - 3 March 1945 (Makati:
Bookmark Incorporated, 1994), 131.

[3] “Advance to Manila: After Action

Report of the XIV Corps - Ml
Operation,” Battle of Manila Online,
accessed March 14, 2016, http://
battleofmanila.org/XIV_CORPS_Ml_
OPERATION/htm/XIV_02.htm.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Robert Ross Smith, Triumph in the
Philippines (Washington D.C.: Center
of Military History United States Army,
1991), 94.

[6] Aluit, By Sword and Fire, 238 - 265.

[7] Ibid., 166.

[8] Ibid., 172.

[9] Ibid., 182.

[10] Ibid., 191.

[11] Ibid., 161.

[12] Smith, Triumph in the Philippines, 306.

[13] Walter F. Bell, The Philippines in World
War II, 1941- 1945: A Chronology
and Select Annotated Bibliography

of Books and Articles in English
(Westport: Greenwood Press, 1999),
252.

[14] Aluit, By Sword and Fire, 405.

[15] Ibid., 405-409.

149

Araw mg Kagitimgam
.Legislation

SASHA MARTINEZ

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
72nd anniversary of the Fall of Bataan, April
9,2014]

April 9, 2014 is the 72nd anniversary of the
fall of Bataan. This year’s commemoration of
Araw ng Kagitingan is a nationwide holiday,
by virtue of Proclamation No. 655, s. 2013 111

By all accounts, the anniversary of the Fall
of Bataan was a day of solemnity, observed
even during the Japanese occupation with
speeches to convince Filipino civilians and
veterans alike, to convince the public to
support the Japanese. It became a solemn
date of commemoration among Filipino
resistance fighters as well as the Philippine
government-in-exile, which promoted
“The Fighting Filipinos” poster on the first
anniversary of the fall of Bataan, as part of
the “Avenge Bataan” War Bonds campaign,
to rally Allied support for the Philippines.
The date would become one commemorated

in speeches and other observances in the
immediate postwar years.

Americans, too, commemorated Bataan:
Field Marshal MacArthur’s Australian
headquarters answered to “Bataan,” while
his command aircraft was also called the
Bataan; 121 as was a United States Navy
aircraft carrier 131 (the first American vessel
named after a World War II battle); even the
streets that demarcate the present Philippine
Embassy in Washington, D.C. carry the
names Bataan and Corregidor. Annually,
the fall of Bataan is marked by the Bataan
Memorial Death March in New Mexico 141 (a
large number of American National Guard
troops had been dispatched to the Philippines
shortly before the outbreak of the War).

Official commemorations on the part of the
Philippine government include the decision by
President Sergio Osmena to set aside public
land for a Bataan National Park. This was
by virtue of Proclamation No. 24, s. 1945, 151
it would be the future site of the Dambana

150

ng Kagitingan, itself an idea first conceived
by Manuel Roxas. Writing in his diary, a
young officer named Felipe Buencamino III
recounted that during a momentary lull in
the fighting, Roxas told Carlos P. Romulo on
February 26, 1942 that,

Romulo and Roxas were talking about the
fighting in Bataan and Roxas said that after
the war, a big national shrine should be
constructed in Mt. Samat to honor all the
heroes that have died and are now dying in
this battle. [6]

In 1953, the eleventh anniversary of the
fall of Bataan, President Elpidio Quirino
declared April 9 as Bataan Day, by virtue
of Proclamation No. 381, s. 1953. 171 The
commemoration was, for President Quirino,
a “fitting homage to the unparalleled heroism
of Filipino and American forces who, despite
overwhelming odds, fought side by side to
the last in their stubborn defense of freedom
and democracy.”

President Ramon Magsaysay then signed
Proclamation No. 11, s. 1954 the following
year, 181 declaring the twelfth anniversary of
the fall of Bataan as a special public holiday.
In 1955, President Magsaysay signed
Proclamation No. 140, s. 1955, 191 once again
declaring Bataan Day as a special public
holiday. The proclamation enjoined Filipinos
and Americans residing in the country to
observe “a one-minute silence at 4:30 p.m.
that day, and to hold appropriate rites in
honor of the heroic defenders of Bataan.”

In 1961, the House of Representatives passed
Republic Act No. 3022, which declared April
9th of every year as “Bataan Day,” a legal

holiday. 1101 The law followed Magsaysay’s
proclamation’s call for one-minute silence
at 4:30 p.m., and enjoined that “appropriate
rites in honor of the heroic defenders of
Bataan and their parents, wives and/or
widows” be held.

Twenty-six years later, under the
administration of President Corazon C.
Aquino, Executive Order No. 203, s. 198 7, 1111
revised the roster of all nationwide holidays
of the Philippines and renamed Bataan
Day to “Araw ng Kagitingan (Bataan and
Corregidor Day).” Among other revisions,
April 9 of every year was changed from being
a legal holiday to, simply, a regular holiday.
A month later, the Administrative Code of
1987 was instituted, 1121 retaining the name of
the April 9 holiday. 1131

In 2007, the Administrative Code of
1987 was amended by President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, with the creation of
moveable holidays — the policy popularly
known as Holiday Economics. Under
Republic Act No. 9492 of 2007, 1141 Araw
ng Kagitingan (Bataan and Corregidor Day)
was commemorated either on April 9th or on
the nearest Monday.

The administration of President Benigno S.
Aquino III reverted to commemorating the
fall of Bataan every April 9th of a given
year. The past four holiday proclamations
of President Aquino have all declared April
9 as a regular nationwide holiday, and have
called the commemoration, simply, Araw ng
Kagitingan.

151

ENDNOTES

[1J “Proclamation No. 655, s. 2013,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines,
September 25, 2013, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/2013/09/25/
proclamation-no-655-s-2013/.

[2] “U.S. Headquarters now ‘Bataan’,” Trove, accessed March 15, 2016, http://trove.nla.

gov.au/newspaper/article/17827274?searchTerm=bataan&;searchLimits=.

[3] “USS Bataan,” USS Bataan Association, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.

bataancvl29.org/Aug%2743-Mar%2744.htm.

[4] “Bataan Memorial Death March,” accessed March 15, 2016, http://bataanmarch.com/.

[5] “Proclamation No. 24, s. 1945,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines,

December 1, 1945, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1945/12/01/
proclamation-no-24-s-1945/.

[6] “Diary of Felipe Buencamino III, February 26, 1942,” The Philippine Diary

Project, accessed March 15, 2016, http://philippinediaryproject.com/1942/02/26/
february-26- 1 942/.

[7] “Proclamation No. 381, s. 1953,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines,

March 21, 1953, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1953/03/21/
proclamation-no-381-s-1953/.

[8] “Proclamation No. 11, s. 1954,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines,

March 23, 1954, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1954/03/23/
proclamation-no-ll-s-1954/.

[9] “Proclamation No. 140, s. 1955,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines,

March 25, 1955, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1955/03/25/
proclamation-no-140-s-1955/.

[10] “Republic Act No. 3022,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines, April 6,
1961, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1961/04/06/republic-act-no-3022/.

[11] “Executive Order No. 203, s. 1987,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, June 30, 1987, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1987/06/30/
executive-order-no-203-s-1987/.

[12] “Executive Order No. 292, s. 1987,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, July 25, 1987, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1987/07/25/
executive-order-no-292/.

[13] “Chapter 7 Regular holidays and nationwide special days,” Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines, July 25, 1987, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/1987/07/25/executive-order-no-292-book-ichapter-7-regular-holidays-and-
nationwide-special-days/.

[14] “Republic Act No. 9492,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines, July 24,
2007, accessed March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/2007/07/24/republic-act-no-9492/.

152

T 1 TTA

tie ira

SASHA MARTINEZ

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
72nd anniversary of the Fall of Bataan, April
9,2014]

On April 9, 1942, officials in command of
Bataan — where Filipino and American forces
maintained the main resistance in the war
against the Japanese — formally surrendered.
Through the Voice of Freedom radio
broadcast, Third Lieutenant Normando
Ildefonso Reyes — reading a message prepared
by Captain Salvador P. Lopez — informed
the Philippines and the world from Malinta
Tunnel in Corregidor: “Bataan has fallen.”

Bataan has fallen. The Philippine-American
troops on this war-ravaged and bloodstained
peninsula have laid down their arms. With heads
bloody but unbowed, they have yielded to the
superior force and numbers of the enemy.

The siege and defense of Bataan lasted 93
days — or just four months after the United
States Army Forces in the Far East (USAFFE,
later renamed United States Forces in the

Philippines) retreated to Bataan. Teodoro
Agoncillo writes in The Fateful Years: Japan’s
Adventure in the Philippines of the events
leading up to General Edward P. King Jr.’s
official surrender of the Bataan command to
Japanese troops:

Whether by design or by accident, [General
Masaharu Homma]’s choice of April 3 as
the opening of his general offensive against
the USFIP (United States Forces in the
Philippines) was significant not only to the
Japanese, but to the Filipino-American troops.
To the Japanese, it was the anniversary of
the death of their first emperor, Jimmu, a
day of fasting and devout ceremonies. To
the Filipinos and the Americans, it meant the
religious observance of the Crucifixion, a day
of fasting, of compassion, and of suffering. To
both combatants, therefore, April 3 was a day
of sacrifice and gloom.

At about 9:00 a.m. [April 3, 1942], an array of
guns, mortars and howitzers began pounding
the USFIP lines with devastating effect. At
the same time, enemy bombers battered
the USFIP targets with such frequency and

153

strength as to shake the whole of central
Bataan and to make the Filipino-American
troops in the foxholes shiver with fright. The
defense constructions so painfully put up by
the Filipinos and Americans were pulverized,
communications lines knocked out, and trees
and grass turned to cinders. The bombing
went on and on until the morale of the
defenders sagged and almost collapsed.
The young and inexperienced Philippine
Army recruits and trainees who were caught
by the way in their training camps and who
were thus compelled to retreat to Bataan
with the rest of the USAFFE units, cowered,
wept and huddled together like frightened
sheep— unable to move and carry their guns
for fear of being blasted out of their foxholes.
For these young boys, most of whom were in
college or high school when they ordered to
report for military training, there could only
be interminable prayers and a faint hope of
salvation from the enemy’s furious bombing
and cannonading.

In the morning of April 4, the Japanese began
another series of air-artillery bombardment
that softened further the already soft USFIP
lines... At dusk, a Japanese unit succeeded in
reaching the foothills of Mt. Samat. They then
regrouped preparatory to an ail-out attack
on the mountain. On Easter Sunday [April 5,
1942], the Japanese renewed their drumfire,
and soon after two columns moved to the
attack... At past noon the Japanese securing
the summit of Mt. Samat.... The Japanese
were now in possession of a strategic area...
At 4:30pm the advance elements of this
column surprised the command post of the
21st Division and captured [their leader]
General Capinpin... That night, the Tanugichi
and the Sato columns joined up at Capinpin’s

former command post. Thus, at the end of
the day, [Masaharu] Flomma's [leader of the
Japanese 14th army] hopes of driving [the Fil-
am forces] to Manila Bay were almost realized.
For him, victory was in sight. As the morning
light filtered through the leafy branches of the
Bataan jungles, April 6, the USFIP jumped off
to a counterattack.

[. ■ ■]

The frenzied enemy bombing and artillery
fire, coupled with hunger and the high
incidence of malaria and other diseases,
further demoralized the Filipino-American
troops. Large groups of soldiers, Filipinos
as well as Americans, moved back to the
rear even without any superior orders to
do so. Attempts to put them back into the
fighting line proved futile. April 7 saw the
disintegration of the USFIP. The Japanese
artillery continued pounding the defender’s
lines; bombers flew no less than 160 sorties
and dropped some 100 tons of explosives on
the Second Corps installations. Intentional or
not, the Japanese bombers hit the hospital
at Little Baguio, and its sick and wounded
patients shrieked in agony and fear as bombs
explored in their midst. Mangled bodies were
strewn in all directions, human flesh was later
found dangling on the trees, and limbs were
almost everywhere.

Along the Second Corps lines chaos and
pandemonium took the place of order and
discipline. In the hope of retrieving the
almost impossible situation, Wainwright, in
the afternoon of April 7, ordered a counter-
attack to the east of the First Corps in an
attempt to maintain the line unbroken from
the east to the west side of the [Bataan]

154

peninsula. Gen. Jones, commander of the
First Corps, protested on the ground that his
men could not make it, particularly because
they were too sick and could not pull the
heavy equipment or artillery. Wainwright then
gave General King, commander of the Luzon
force, the right to make the final decision...
Homma, who had estimated his final drive to
last a month, was jubilant over his enemy’s
unexpected deterioration. He took advantage
of the chaos reigning in his enemy’s camp by
ordering his troops to push on to Cabcaben,
at the tip of Bataan...

The USFIP was no longer in a position to meet
this enemy thrust. The troops were suffering
from extreme hunger and from lack of sleep.
“We were so tired,” said one officer, “that
the only way to stay awake was to remain
standing.” Added to this discomfiture was
the enemy’s constant bombing and strafing.
Incendiary bombs were dropped on USFIP
positions along the cogon grass, and when
“hell broke loose" the troops were transformed
into firemen desperately trying to put out the
raging fire with whatever equipment they had
at the moment.

On April 8, [Wainwright] wrote MacArthur that
his men’s power of resistance was practically
nil and that he was “forced to report that the
troops on Bataan are fast folding up.”

As early as April 7, King had already been
toying with the idea of surrendering to the
enemy. The Second Corps was in shambles;
the First Corps, though intact, was in full
retreat. Equipment was being put to the torch.
The trails and roads were clogged with men
and assorted vehicles that made movement
almost an impossibility. Nobody knew the

direction of his march. And all wanted a piece
of earth, a little space on which they could
rest their weary heads. Communications
between the frontline and headquarters no
longer existed and “orders had to be revoked
because they could not be complied with.”

On April 8, General King ordered his field
commanders to make adequate preparations
for the destruction of equipment and
weapons, except vehicles and gasoline. At
11:00 pm, when all seemed lost, King held a
"weighty conference” with his chief of staff
and the operations officer. There was much
introspection and self-analysis. King laid
before his senior officers the actual situation
and asked whether the enemy, under the
circumstances, would succeed in reaching
Mariveles, and thus dominate Corregidor
island, with or without opposition from them.
Reviewing the tactical situation, all were
agreed that there was no way of stopping the
Japanese from capturing Mariveles not later
than the evening of April 9. With no relief in
sight, King then decided to negotiate with the
Japanese to surrender.”

Thus General Edward P. King surrendered the
Bataan command to the Japanese. His meeting
with General Nagano Kameichiro and Colonel
Nakayama Motoo began at 11:00 a.m. of April
9, 1942; he officially surrendered the Bataan
command on 12:30 p.m. John H. Whitman
notes in Bataan: Our Last Ditch, that General
King enacted a scene that had not been seen
since 1865 and that has not been seen since,
the surrender of an American army.” Agoncillo
writes of the meeting:

King, as befits a military man, rose to greet
Nakayama, but the latter, obviously displaying

155

the air of a conqueror, brushed him off and
proceeded to the head of the table. King, at
the opposite end of the table, never looked
“more like a soldier than in this hour of defeat.”

It was quite obvious at the start that
Nakayama had no definite instructions, for
Homma believed that King was Wainwright's
representative and, consequently, sent a man
of lesser rank to meet with King. [King explains
that] he could not get Wainwright and that
he represented the forces on Bataan alone.
He explained in detail that he was seeking
armistice to prevent further bloodshed.
Consequently, he asked the Japanese to stop
their bombing missions. Nakayama pointed
out that it was impossible, for their planes had
missions until noon.

Thinking of the sick and the wounded, King
requested that his troops be permitted to
leave Bataan under their own officers and
that the sick and the wounded be allowed
to ride in their vehicles to be delivered at
any place General Homma might designate.
Nakayama refused to consider this request
and insisted that cessation of hostilities
would be considered only on the basis of the
surrender of all the forces in the Philippines. “It
is absolutely impossible,” said Nakayama, “for
me to consider negotiations... in any limited
area.” However, he added that if the units on
Bataan wanted to surrender as units they
could do so “voluntarily and unconditionally."

“Will our troops be well treated?” King wanted
assurances.

“We are not barbarians. Will you surrender
unconditionally?” the Japanese asked with
some asperity.

King, realizing the impossibility of his
position and that of his men, decided to give
up. At 12:30 p.m, he agreed to surrender
unconditionally.

He handed his pistol to Nakayama, in lieu of his
saber, which, he explained, he had left behind
in Manila when the war broke out. His officers
followed suit and they became captives of
the enemy. Col. Collier and Major Hurt were
sent back to King’s headquarters to break the
news to Gen. Funk, King's chief of staff. On the
way, they notified all troops of the armistice
and told them to march to the East Road and
there await further instructions. The Japanese,
on the other hand, agreed to advance only as
far as Cabcaben airfield and no further. The
Battle of Bataan was over.

In Australia, President Manuel L. Quezon
made his first public statement since arriving
Australia, summarized by the press as
pledging the Philippines to the Allied cause,
and which paid a “glowing tribute” to the
valor of Filipino troops who fought side by
side with the Americans. Every Filipino who
fought on Bataan will be a national hero,
he said; and pointed out that resistance
continued in other parts of the country. For
his part, General MacArthur read a statement
to reporters, following the fall of Bataan:

“The Bataan Force went out as it would have
wished, fighting to the end its flickering,
forlorn hope. No army has done so much with
so little, and nothing became it more than its
last hour of trial and agony. To the weeping
mothers of its dead, I can only say that the
sacrifice and halo of Jesus of Nazareth has
descended upon their sons, and that God will
take them unto Himself.”

156

Halfway through the Voice of Freedom radio
broadcast, Third Lieutenant Reyes read,
“Bataan has fallen, but the spirit that made
it stand — a beacon to all the liberty-loving
peoples of the world — cannot fall!”

After the official surrender of Bataan to
the Imperial Japanese Forces, thousands of
Filipino and American soldiers were forced
to march from Mariveles, Bataan to Capas,
Tarlac. The prisoners initially began on foot
but then transferred to freight cars. Whitman
writes:

Because of the complete breakdown in the
army's organization, the losses suffered by
the defenders in the final week of fighting will
never be known. The Luzon Force personnel
officer's returns for April 3 carried 78,100
Filipinos and Americans on the rolls. About
3,000 men escaped to Corregidor. There were
about 45,000 Filipinos and 9,300 Americans
in Camp O’Donnell prison camp between
April 10 and June 4. The difference in the two
figures, 75,000 and 54,300, is due to fighting,
the Death March, and most significant,
disease and starvation in the prison camp
itself. Within two months of the surrender,
more than 21,000 men disappeared.

The death toll may vary, but the Death
March is widely considered one of the worst
atrocities of the war.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agoncillo, Teodoro. The The Fateful Years:
Japan’s Adventure in the Philippines. Quezon
City: R.R Garcia Pub. Co., 1965.

“Army News Daily Bulletin, April 12, 1942.”
National Library of Australia, accessed
March 15, 2016. http://trove.nla.gov.au/
newspaper/ article/3 8 32 8 93 0 .

“Bataan Has Fallen.” Presidential Museum
and Library, accessed March 15, 2016. http://
malacanang.gov.ph/1226-bataan-has-fallen/.

Whitman, John W. Bataan, our Last Ditch:
The Bataan Campaign, 1942. New York:
Hippocrene Books, 1990.

157

Japanese Invasion
of the Philippines

JEAN ARBOLEDA AND SASHA MARTINEZ

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
72nd anniversary of the Fall of Bataan, April
9, 2014]

President Manuel L. Quezon was in Baguio,
recovering from an illness, when Executive
Secretary Jorge Vargas informed him — at
3:00 a.m. of December 8, 1941, Philippine
time — of the Imperial Japanese Forces’
attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii.

A reporter, Yay Panlilio, had gone up to
Baguio to get a statement from President
Quezon. Just after the dawn, President
Quezon sat down to write, “The zero hour
has arrived. I expect every Filipino — man and
woman — to do his duty. We have pledged our
honor to stand to the last by the United States
and we shall not fail her, happen what may.”

At 6:20 a.m., Japanese aircraft attacked
Davao. At 8:30 a.m., Baguio, Tuguegarao,
and Tarlac were simultaneously attacked by
the Japanese. 1 ' 1 By the close of December 8,
the Japanese army had bombed airfields in
Zambales, Clark Field Pampanga, and Fort
McKinley on the outskirts of Manila.

On December 1 8 , 1 94 1 , by virtue of Executive
Order No. 386, s. 1941, the Philippine flag
was reversed to indicate a state of war. [2] Not
since the Philippine-American War was the
flag flown with the red side up.

158

The Japanese invasion of the Philippines
began on December 8, 1941 [3] ; on December
24, 1941, the United States Army Forces in
the Far East Fligh Command and the War
Cabinet of the Commonwealth withdrew to
Corregidor. 141 On December 26, 1 94 1 , Manila
was declared an Open City! 51 The Japanese
occupied Manila on January 2, 1942 and the
siege of Bataan and Corregidor began! 61 The
ordeal of the Filipino and American troops
in Bataan and Corregidor was marked with
audacious exploits: from the naval heroism
demonstrated by Ramon Alcaraz and other
intrepid officers and crew of the Philippine
Army’s Q-Boats, to the derring-do and aerial
valor of pilots such as Jose Villamor, to the
untold hardships endured by Philippine
Scouts, Philippine Army and Constabulary
troops, and American forces as they parried
the attacks of the Japanese, including some
signal successes such as the Battle of the
Points on January 23 to February 13, 1941.

ENDNOTES

[1J Louis Morton, The War in the Pacific:

The Fall of the Philippines (Washington,
D.C.: Center of Military Flistory, 1989),
84-88.

[2] “Executive Order No. 386, s. 1941,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1941/12/18/
executive-order-no-386-s- 1 941/.

[3] Morton, War in the Pacific, 79.

[4] “Diary of Basilio J. Valdes, December

24, 1941,” Philippine Diary Project,
accessed March 15, 2016, https://
philippinediaryproj ect. wordpress .
com/1 94 l/12/24/december-24- 1941-
wednesday/.

[5] Walter F. Bell, The Philippines in World

War II 1941 - 1945: A Chronology and
Select Annotated Bibliography of Books
and Articles in English (Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, 1999), 8.

[6] Ibid., 10.

159

UDMC

JEAN ARBOLEDA AND FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
70th anniversary of the Second Philippine
Republic, October 14, 2013]

The Second Philippine Republic was
established during the Japanese occupation
of the Philippines. At the outset of the
occupation, the Japanese government
established a military administration over
the Philippines, as well as the Philippine
Executive Commission, composed of
several pre-war Filipino political leaders.
The Kapisanan ng Paglilingkod sa Bagong
Pilipinas (KALIBAPI) was also organized,
designed to be the sole and exclusive political
organization in the Philippines. 111

On June 16, 1943, Premier Hideki Tojo
promised independence to the Philippines. The
KALIBAPI would then form the Preparatory
Committee on Philippine Independence
(PCPI), which was tasked with drafting a
new Constitution. 121 The new Constitution
was approved by the Preparatory Committee
on Philippine Independence on September

4, 1943 and ratified by the KALIBAPI on
September 6, 1943. 131

The KALIBAPI then proceeded to elect part
of the new National Assembly, which also
included appointed members; in turn, the
National Assembly elected its Speaker and
then elected Jose P. Laurel as President. 141 On
October 14, 1943, in ceremonies in front of
the Legislative Building in Manila, the new
Republic was inaugurated, and Jose P. Laurel,
the Chairman of the Preparatory Committee,
assumed office as President. 151

On September 21, 1944, President Laurel
proclaimed martial law in the Philippines
(it came into effect on September 22). On
September 23, 1944, Laurel proclaimed
that the Philippines was “in a state of war”
with the Allied Powers — but this was never
ratified by the National Assembly. 161 In large
part, Japanese dissapointment with Laurel
led to the Republic under Laurel being
superseded by the Makapili, organized in
December 1944 to more militantly oppose
the returning American forces and Filipino
guerrillas. 171 The Japanese brought the Laurel

160

government to Baguio in December 1944,
and a small remnant of that government
was taken to Tokyo in March 1945. Laurel
formally dissolved the Second Republic
on August 17, 1945, two days after Japan
surrendered to the Allies. 181

When the Commonwealth government was
restored on Philippine soil on October 23,
1944, General Douglas MacArthur as military
commander had issued a proclamation
nullifying all acts of the Philippine Executive
Commission and the Second Republic. The
Supreme Court of the Philippines reiterated
this nullification in a decision (G.R. No. L-5)
on September 17, 1945 (and subsequent
decisions), but pointed out that President
Osmena recognized the validity of some
judicial acts of a non-political nature. The
Supreme Court categorized the Philippine
Executive Commission and the Second
Republic as a de facto (actual, whether by
right or not) government, in contrast to the
de jure (rightful, or legitimate) status of the
Commonwealth government. While this
means no laws or regulations from the Second
Republic are legally recognized, President
Laurel has been included in the roster of
Philippine presidents since the 1960s.

Many officials who served in the Philippine
Executive Commission, the Second Republic,
and its various agencies were charged with
treason but received an amnesty from
President Manuel Roxas on January 28, 1948.

ENDNOTES

[1J Ricardo Trota Jose, “The Association
for Service to the New Philippines
(KALIBAPI): Attempting to Transplant
a Japanese Wartime Concept to the
Philippines,” The Journal of Sophia
Asian Studies 19 (2001), 153.

[2] Dapen Liang, Philippine Parties

and Politics: A Historical Study of
National Experience in Democracy,
(San Francisco, CA: The Gladstone
Company, 1970), 249.

[3] Ibid., 266.

[4] Ibid., 251.

[5] Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Philippine Electoral
Almanac, rev. and exp. ed. (Manila:
PCDSPO, 2015), 72.

[6] “Proclamation No. 30, proclaiming

the existence of a state of war in the
Philippines,” The Lawphil Project,
accessed March 7, 2016, http://www2.
austlii.edu.au/~graham/AsianLII/
Philippines/executive/Proclamations/
proc_30_1944.rtf.

[7] Ricardo Trota Jose, “Jose P. Laurel as

President of the Second Philippine
Republic,” Presidential Museum and
Library, accessed March 11, 2016,
http://malacanang.gov.ph/5237-dr-jose-
p-laurel-as-president-of-the-second-
philippine-republic/.

[8] Ibid.

161

nni ° t

IfllFO

JOSELITO ARCINAS

>Mbue

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
69th Republic Day, July 4, 2015]

The Third Republic of the Philippines was
inaugurated on July 4, 1946. It marked
the culmination of the peaceful campaign
for Philippine Independence — the two
landmarks of which were the enactment of
the Jones Law in 1916 (in which the United
States Congress pledged independence for
the Philippines once Filipinos have proven
their capability for self-government) and
the Philippine Independence Act of 1934
(popularly known as the Tydings-McDuffie
Act) which put in place a ten-year transition
period during which the Philippines had
Commonwealth status. The Third Republic
also marked the recognition by the global
community of nations, of the nationhood
of the Philippines — a process that began
when the Commonwealth of the Philippines
joined the Anti- Axis Alliance known as the
United Nations on June 14, 1942, receiving
recognition as an Allied nation even before
independence.

Thus, the inauguration of the Third Republic
marked the fulfillment of the long struggle for
independence that began with the Philippine
Revolution on August 23, 1896 (recent
scholarship suggests, on August 24) and
which was formalized on June 12, 1898 with
the Proclamation of Philippine Independence
at Kawit, Cavite.

From 1946 to 1961, Independence Day
was celebrated on July 4. On May 12,
1962, President Diosdado Macapagal
issued Proclamation No. 28, s. 1962, which
declared June 12 as Independence Day. In
1964, Congress passed Republic Act No.
4166, which formally designated June 12 of
every year as the date on which we celebrate
Philippine independence. July 4 in turn has
been observed as Republic Day since then.

THE ROXAS ADMINISTRATION
(MAY 28, 1946 - APRIL 15, 1948)

President Manuel Roxas, in his first State of
the Nation Address, detailed the challenges
the country was facing in the aftermath
of war: A government “without financial

162

means to support even its basic functions,” 111
scarcity in commodities especially of food,
hyperinflation, the “tragic destruction”! 21
of a productive economy, and still-ongoing
rehabilitation among the different sectors of
society.

In an effort to solve the massive socio-
economic problems of the period, President
Roxas reorganized the government, and
proposed a wide-sweeping legislative
program. Among the undertakings of the
Third Republic’s initial year were: The
establishment of the Rehabilitation Finance
Corporation (which would be reorganized
in 1958 as the Development Bank of the
Philippines); 131 the creation of the Department
of Foreign Affairs and the organization of the
foreign service through Executive Order No.
18; the GI Bill of Rights for Filipino veterans;
and the revision of taxation laws to increase
government revenues. 141

President Roxas moved to strengthen
sovereignty by proposing a Central Bank for
the Philippines to administer the Philippine
banking system 151 which was established by
virtue of Republic Act No. 265.

PHOTO: President Manuel Roxas takes his oath of
office during the Independence Ceremony of July 4,
1946. Administering the oath is Chief Justice Manuel
Moran. Photo courtesy of the National Library of the
Philippines.

PHOTO: President Manuel Roxas addressing the
lawmakers of the Second Commonwealth Congress
of the Philippines during his first State of the Nation
Address on June 3, 1946 at a converted school house
at Lepanto Street, Manila. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

In leading a “cash-starved 161 government”
that needed to attend to a battered nation.
President Roxas campaigned for the Parity
Amendment to the 1935 Constitution. This
amendment, demanded by the Philippine
Trade Relations Act or the Bell Trade Act, 171
would give American citizens and industries
the right to utilize the country’s natural
resources in return for rehabilitation support
from the United States. The President, with
the approval of Congress, proposed this
move to the nation through a plebiscite.

The amendment was necessary to attract
rehabilitation funds and investments at a
time when public and official opinion in the
United States had swung back to isolationism
(the Cold War, and a corresponding reversal
in what had been heretofore a return of
isolationism, would only come a few years
later). On March 11, 1947, a total of
432,933 (78.89% of the electorate) voted
in favor of the Parity Amendment. 181 The
approval of the amendment had provided the
nation with $620 million 191 in war damage

163

compensation, through the Philippine War
Damage Commission.

A major initiative arising from preliminary
wartime discussions about the future
security of the Philippines, was the United
States-Philippine Military Bases Agreement
of 1947, which gave the United States the
right to retain the use of sixteen bases, free
of rent, with the option to use seven more for
a term of 99 years. I10]

The Roxas administration also pioneered
the foreign policy of the Republic. Vice
President Elpidio Quirino was appointed
Secretary of Foreign Affairs. General Carlos
P. Romulo, as permanent representative 1111 of
the Philippines to the United Nations, helped
shape the country’s international identity in
the newly established stage for international
diplomacy and relations. During the Roxas
administration, the Philippines established
diplomatic ties with foreign countries and
gained membership to international entities,
such as the United Nations General Assembly,
the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the

PHOTO: On April 17, 1948, Vice President Elpidio
Quirino, back in Malacanan Palace, knelt and wept
unabashed before the casket bearing the remains
of President Manuel Roxas. Photo courtesy of the
National Library of the Philippines.

World Elealth Organization (WEIO), the
International Labor Organization (ILO), etc.

On April 15, 1948, following a speech before
an audience of assembled airmen at Clark
Field Air Base, President Roxas died of a
heart attack. Vice President Elpidio Quirino
assumed the presidency on April 17, 1948.

THE QUIRINO ADMINISTRATION
(APRIL 17, 1948 - DECEMBER 30, 1953)

President Elpidio Quirino’s goal as chief
executive, as stated in his first State of
the Nation Address, revolved around
strengthening the people’s confidence in the
government and the restoration of peace. In
order to achieve these, the Chief Executive
travelled around the country to inspect
firsthand the condition of the nation.

President Quirino established the Action
Committee on Social Amelioration through

PHOTO: President Elpidio Quirino delivering his First
State of the Nation Address on January 24, 1949. Photo
courtesy of the National Library of the Philippines.

164

Administrative Order No. 68, in order to
efficiently promote the welfare of citizens
in the rural districts. He established the
Social Security Study Commission by virtue
of Executive Order No. 150, to investigate
socio-economic problems of the working class
and formulate legislation developing social
welfare. The Labor Management Advisory
Board, established by Executive Order No.
158, formulated labor policies and conducted
studies on the ways and means of preventing,
minimizing, and reconciling labor disputes.
The Agricultural Credit and Cooperative
Financing Administration, established by
Republic Act. No. 821, assisted farmers
in securing credit as well as developing
cooperative associations to efficiently market
their agricultural commodities.

The Quirino administration reached out to
the leaders and members of Hukbo ng Bayan
Laban sa Hapon (HUKBALAHAP) and the
Pambansang Kaisahan ng mga Magbubukid
(PKM) to negotiate peace and put an
end to the insurgency. In 1948, through
Proclamation No. 76, the government granted
amnesty to the insurgents that surrendered
arms. The negotiation failed to persuade
HUKBALAHAP leader Luis Taruc and other
rebel leaders, as they conceded to register but
never disarm. From 1950 to 1953, Secretary
of National Defense Ramon Magsaysay
and President Quirino exerted efforts in
reforming the nation’s Armed Forces and
promoting welfare of citizens in the rural
areas through the Economic Development
Corps (EDCOR) [12] and Land Settlement and
Development Corporation (LASEDECO) 1131 .
This resulted to a considerable improvement
to the country’s insurgency problem. There
were over 25,000 armed communists in

PHOTO: President Elpidio Quirino shaking
hands with Huk Leader Luis Taruc upon issuing
amnesty to the rebel group on the condition that
they disarm on June 21, 1948. The negotiation
will eventually collapse on August, 1948. Photo
courtesy of the National Library of the Philippines.

early 1950 — two thirds of which had either
been captured, killed, or had voluntarily
surrendered; an estimated 60,000 firearms
were surrendered or captured. 1141

The Quirino administration came to a close
in the presidential elections of 1953. It was
a battle between incumbent Liberal Party of
President Quirino against the charismatic
Nacionalista candidate Ramon Magsaysay.
It was a landslide victory for Magsaysay,
who gained 2,912,992 votes or 68.9% of the
electorate.

THE MAGSAYSAY ADMINISTRATION
(DECEMBER 30, 1953 - MARCH 17, 1957)

To help the rural masses was the focal point
of the populist administration 1151 of President
Ramon Magsaysay. President Magsaysay
insisted in meeting and communicating with
his people. In his first Executive Order, he
established the Presidential Complaint and
Action Commission, which investigated
various citizen complaints and recommended
remedial actions through different

165

PHOTO: President-elect Ramon Magsaysay tries
out the presidential chair, on the invitation of
President Elpidio Quirino, when Magsaysay arrived
to fetch the latter on inaugural day. Taken on
December 30, 1953. Photo courtesdy of Palacio de
Malacanang.

government agencies. The Commission
served to boost the nation’s confidence with
its government; it was seen as a fulfilment
of President Magsaysay’s promise, stated in
his inaugural address, to become a President
for the people. The principles of the
Magsaysay administration were codified in
the Magsaysay Credo, and became the theme
of leadership and public service.

Among the accomplishments of the
Magsaysay administration were the Social
Security Law of 1954 or Republic Act No.
1161. In an effort to solve the problems
of communism and insurgency, President
Magsaysay sought to protect the farmers,
through the creation of laws such as: the
Agricultural Tenancy Act of the Philippines or

PHOTO: Champion of the Masses - President
Ramon Magsaysay was warmly received by the
crowd during one of his Presidential visits. Photo
courtesy of the National Library of the Philippines.

PHOTO: The Agricultural Tenancy Act and the Land
Reform Act of 1955 are among the laws enacted
by President Ramon Magsaysay to help protect
the local farmers. Photo courtesy of the National
Library of the Philippines.

Republic Act No. 1 1 99; the Land Reform Act
of 1955 through Republic Act No. 1400; the
formation of the Court of Agrarian Relations
through Republic Act No. 1267; and the
National Resettlement and Rehabilitation
Administration (NARRA) through Republic
Act No. 1160. The administration achieved
victory over insurgents with the surrender of
Huk leader Luis Taruc in 1954.

In the field of international diplomacy and
defense, President Magsaysay, through

166

the Manila Pact of 1954 or the Southeast
Asia Collective Defense Treaty, led the
establishment of the Southeast Asian Treaty
Organization (SEATO). [lsl

The Laurel-Langley Agreement, signed
during the Magsaysay administration, gave
the Philippines a preferential trade system 1171
with the United States and other countries.
Among its provisions were the right to
impose quotas on non-quota articles and the
right to impose export taxes. 1181

On March 17, 1957, President Magsaysay
and 25 other passengers of the presidential
plane Mt. Pinatubo perished in a crash, at
Mt. Manunggal, Cebu. Vice President Carlos
P. Garcia succeeded to the presidency on
March 18, 1957.

THE GARCIA ADMINISTRATION
(MARCH 18, 1957 - DECEMBER 30, 1961)

President Carlos P. Garcia, in his inaugural
address, sought the help and support of the
masses in accomplishing the tremendous
responsibilities of the presidency and in
carrying on the legacy of the Magsaysay
administration. President Garcia used the
momentum of the previous administration’s
campaign on social welfare and signed the
amendment of the Social Security Law
through Republic Act 1792, establishing
the Social Security System on September 1,
1957. [19]

President Garcia ran for the presidential
elections of 1957. It was the first time in
electoral history where there were four
serious contenders to the presidency, namely:
Jose Yulo, Claro M. Recto, Manuel Manahan,

PHOTO: A nation in mourning— a huge crowd
joined the funeral procession of President Ramon
Magsaysay as it passed through the streets of
Manila. Our Guy and his Legacy— The Ramon
Magsaysay Award, created in 1957, is the highest
prize for leadership in Asia. The award is presented
every 31st of August— the birth anniversary of
President Ramon Magsaysay. Photo courtesy of the
National Library of the Philippines.

PHOTO: President Carlos P. Garcia was received by
the crowd during his campaign for the Presidential
Elections of 1957. Photo courtesy of the National
Library of the Philippines.

PHOTO: (From left to right) Vice President
Diosdado Macapagal, First Lady Leonila Dimataga-
Garcia, President Carlos P Garcia and Mrs. Eva
Macapagal during their inauguration on December
30, 1957. Photo courtesy of the National Library of
the Philippines.

167

and President Garcia. The incumbent
president won the elections with 41.3% of the
electorate. It was the first time that a president
was elected by plurality of candidates instead
of a majority vote. It was also the first time
where the elected president and vice president
did not come from the same political party —
President Garcia was a Nacionalista and Vice
President Diosdado Macapagal a Liberal.

The Garcia administration promoted the
“Filipino First” policy, whose focal point was
to regain economic independence; a national
effort by Filipinos to “obtain major and
dominant participation in their economy.” 1201
The administration campaigned for the
citizens’ support in patronizing Filipino
products and services, and implemented
import and currency controls favorable for
Filipino industries. 1211 In connection with the
government’s goal of self-sufficiency was the
“Austerity Program,” which President Garcia
described in his first State of the Nation

PHOTO: The second inauguration of Carlos P.
Garcia, at the Independence Grandstand (now
Quirino Grandstand). Photo courtesy of the
National Library of the Philippines.

Address as “more work, more thrift, more
productive investment, and more efficiency”
that aimed to mobilize national savings.
1221 The Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act, through Republic Act No. 301, aimed
to prevent corruption, and promote honesty
and public trust. Another achievement of the
Garcia administration was the Bohlen-Serrano
Agreement of 1959, which shortened the term
of lease of the United States military bases in
the country from the previous 99 to 25 years! 231

President Garcia lost to Vice President
Diosdado Macapagal in the presidential race
of 1961. 1241

THE MACAPAGAL ADMINISTRATION
(DECEMBER 30, 1961 - DECEMBER 30, 1965)

President Diosdado Macapagal, during his
inaugural address on December 30, 1961,
emphasized the responsibilities and goals
to be attained in the “new era” that was the
Macapagal administration. He reiterated his
resolve to eradicate corruption, and assured
the public that honesty would prevail in his
presidency. President Macapagal, too, aimed
at self-sufficiency and the promotion of every

PHOTO: “To solve the immediate problems of the
present” and “to build materially and spiritually
for the future” were the goals of the "New Era” of
President Diosdado Macapagal. Photo courtesy of
the National Library of the Philippines.

168

citizen’s welfare, through the partnership of
the government and private sector, and to
alleviate poverty by providing solutions for
unemployment.

Among the laws passed during the
Macapagal administration were: Republic
Act No. 3844 or the Agricultural Land
Reform Code (an act that established the
Land Bank of the Philippines); 1251 Republic
Act No. 3466, which established the
Emergency Employment Administration;
Republic Act No. 3518, which established
the Philippine Veterans Bank; Republic Act
No. 3470, which established the National
Cottage Industries Development Authority
(NACIDA) to organize, revive, and promote

jpjG.Of lMmi«U,LMSElli)lD(l)\M[

PHOTO: President Diosdado Macapagal signs the
first leasehold contract in Plaridel, Bulacan in front
of a crowd of tenant-farmers and landowners on
July 4, 1964. Photo courtesy of National Library of
the Philippines.

PHOTO: President Sukarno, President Diosdado
Macapagal and Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman
of Malaysia signing agreements forming the
MAPHILINDO on August 5, 1963 at the Juan Luna
Hall of the Department of Foreign Affairs. Photo
courtesy of National Library of the Philippines.

the establishment of local cottage industries;
and Republic Act No. 4156, which
established the Philippine National Railways
(PNR) to operate the national railroad and
tramways. The administration lifted foreign
exchange controls as part of the decontrol
program in an attempt to promote national
economic stability and growth.

In the field of foreign relations, the
Philippines became a founding member of
Maphilindo, through the Manila Accord of
1963d 261 The regional organization of Malay
states strove for “Asian solutions by Asian
nations for Asian problems,” and aimed
to solve national and regional problems
through regional diplomacy.

The Macapagal administration closed with
the presidential elections of 1965. The
“Poor boy from Lubao” was defeated by the
Nacionalista candidate Ferdinand E. Marcos.

THE MARCOS ADMINISTRATION
(DECEMBER 30, 1965 - FEBRUARY 25, 1986)

The last president of the Third Republic of
the Philippines was President Ferdinand E.
Marcos. Prior to the events of Martial Law,

PHOTO: First inauguration of President Ferdinand
E. Marcos held at the Quirino Grandstand, Manila,
December 30, 1965. Photo courtesy of Wikimedia
Commons.

169

the first term of the Marcos administration,
as emphasized in his inaugural address on
December 30, 1965, focused on “the revival
of the greatness of the nation.”

President Marcos, faced with the challenge of
corruption in the government, reorganized the
Armed Forces, the Philippine Constabulary,
and the Bureau of Internal Revenue. In an
attempt to solve the problem of technical
smuggling, the Bureau of Customs was also
reorganized. The administration, with a goal
to strengthen the local economy, devised
construction programs and irrigation projects.
The promotion of Philippine heritage,
culture, and arts was achieved through the
establishment of the Cultural Center of the
Philippines (CCP) in 1969. 1271

Under the Marcos administration, the
country hosted the Manila Summit in 1966.
The conference aimed to resolve the Vietnam
War, and sought the restoration of peace and
the promotion of economic stability and
development throughout the Asia-Pacific
region. 1281

Among the laws approved by President Marcos
were: Republic Act No. 5 1 86 or the Investments
Incentives Act; Republic Act No. 4864 or the
Police Act of 1966; and Republic Act No. 5173,
which established the Philippine Coast Guard.

President Marcos won his re-election bid in
the 1969 presidential elections against Liberal
Party’s Sergio Osmena Jr. President Marcos
gained 5,017,343 votes or 61.47% of the
electorate to become only the second Philippine
president in history to win reelection and the
first to do so in the Third Republic.

PHOTO: Re-electionist President Ferdinand E.
Marcos during his campaign for the Presidential
Elections of 1969. Photo courtesy of the National
Library of the Philippines.

On the J anuary 3 0, 1 970, to protest the violent
dispersal of the student-led rally during
President Marcos’ fifth State of the Nation
Address four days earlier, a demonstration
was held in front of Malacanan Palace. This
event intensified into a protracted and vicious
battle between authorities and the students
who tried to storm the palace. A fire truck
was rammed into one of the Palace gates;
properties were destroyed and fires were
started by the rallyists. Two persons were
reportedly killed and 106 were injured. The
incident and the rallies thereafter became
known as the First Quarter Storm, a period of
unrest marked by a series of demonstrations
against the Marcos administration. 1291

On November 27 of the same year, Blessed
Pope Paul VI traveled to the Philippines,
attending to the 63.2 million Filipino
Catholic faithful. It marked the first time
the head of the Catholic church visited the
country. Surviving an assassination attempt
upon his arrival, the Pontiff continued his
Philippine visit. He officiated the first Papal
Mass in the Far East at the Manila Cathedral,
as well as an open-air mass at the Rizal Park.

170

As opposition to President Marcos grew
significantly due to corruption in the
administration, the Liberal Party then saw
an opportunity in the midterm elections of
1971. The miting de avance of the Liberal
Party held at Plaza Miranda on August 21,
1971 was cut short when two bombs were
hurled at the opposition candidates, killing
nine people and injuring about a hundred. [301
Because of this incident, President Marcos
suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus,
leading to the arrest and incarceration of
twenty people.

PHOTO Pope Paul VI with President Ferdinand
E. Marcos on the balcony of the north wing of
Malacanan Palace. Photo from Malacanan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History.

The Plaza Miranda Bombing, alongside the
increasing strength of the Communist Party
of the Philippines and its military wing, the
New People’s Army, and the Marcos-staged
ambush on the convoy of Secretary of Defense
Juan Ponce Enrile on the night of September
22, 1972, were the pretext for Marcos’
declaration of Martial Law on September 23,
1972, by virtue of Proclamation No. 1081.
The said proclamation was dated September
21, when in fact it was only put into effect on
September 23.

Opponents of the administration were
incarcerated; decree-making powers
were asserted by the President, and when
the ongoing Constitutional Convention

CONGRESS ofthe PHILIPPINE!

SENATE

PHOTO: Senators Salvador Laurel, Eva Estrada
Kalaw, Ramon Mitra, Gerardo Roxas, and Jovito
Salonga outside the padlocked Senate session hall.
Photo taken from Doy Laurel by Celia Diaz-Laurel.

171

produced a draft document, a series of
“barangay assemblies” were held to prevent
Congress from convening as scheduled in
January 1973. After claiming approval of a
new Constitution, the dictatorship ordered
Congress padlocked. The “ratification” of
the 1973 Constitution marked the end of
the Third Republic and the beginning of
the Bagong Lipunan — the New Society as
the Martial Law Regime was called — under
President Marcos.

In 1981, through Proclamation No. 2045,
Martial Law was lifted throughout the
country and marked the beginning of
the “New,” or Fourth, Republic of the
Philippines.

ENDNOTES

[1J “President Roxas on First State of
the Nation Address, June 3, 1946,”
Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, June 3, 1946,
accessed July 2, 2015, http://www.
gov.ph/1946/06/03/manuel-roxas-
first-state-of-the-nation-address-
june-3-1946/.

[2] Ibid.

[3] “History of the Development Bank of

the Philippines,” Development Bank of
the Philippines, accessed July 2, 2015,
https://www.devbnkphl.com/about.
php?cat=9.

[4] Blue Book of the First Year of the

Republic, (Manila: Bureau of Printing,
1947), 27.

[5] “Creating a Central Bank for the

Philippines,” Bangko Sentral ng
Pilipinas, accessed July 2, 2015, http://
www.bsp.gov.ph/about/history.asp.

[6] Lewis Gleeck, The Third Republic

(Quezon City: New Day Publishers,
1993), 47.

[7] Gregoire Leclerc and Charles A. S. Hall,

Making World Development Work:
Scientific Alternatives to Neoclassical
Economic Theory (Albuquerque,

NM: University of New Mexico Press,
2007), 168.

[8] Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Philippine Electoral
Almanac (Manila: PCDSPO, 2013), 23.

[9] Artemio R. Guillermo, Historical

Dictionary of the Philippines (Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Press, 2012), 71.

[10] “Message of President Roxas
to the Senate on the Agreement
Concerning American Military Bases
in the Philippines, March 17, 1947,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, March 17, 1947,
accessed July 2, 2015, http://www.gov.
ph/1 947/03/1 7/message-of-president-
roxas-to-the-senate-on-the-agreement-
concerning-american-military-bases-in-
the-philippines-march-1 7-1947/.

[11] Pacifico A. Castro, Diplomatic Agenda
of the Philippine Presidents (Manila:
Foreign Service Institute, 1985), 1.

[12] Salvador Lopez, The judgment of
History (Mandaluyong City: Elpidio
Quirino Foundation, 1990), 133.

[13] “Executive Order No. 355, s. 1950,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, October 23, 1950, http://
www.gov.ph/1 950/1 0/23/executive-
order-no-355-s-1950/.

[14] Carlos Quirino, Apo Lakay (Makati
City: Total Book World, 1987), 109.

[15] Gleeck, The Third Republic, 150.

172

[16] David Shavit, The United States
in Asia: A Historical Dictionary
(Westport, CT: Greenwood Press,

1990), 332-333.

[17] Astri Suhrke, “US-Philippines: The End
of a Special Relationship,” The World
Today 31, no. 2 (February 1975): 80-
88 .

[18] “December 15, 1954,” Presidential
Museum and Library (Tumblr),
accessed July 2, 2015, http://tumblr.
malacanang.gov.ph/post/45 179885902/
december-15-1954-the-laurel-langley-
agreement-is.

[19] “SSS Guidebook: 2010 Web Site
Edition,” Social Security System,
accessed July 2, 2015, https://
www.sss.gov.ph/sss/ adContent?
fileName=SSSGuidebook _2010.pdf.

[20] “Carlos P. Garcia, Third State of the
Nation Address, January 25, 1960,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, January 25, 1960,
accessed July 2, 2015, http://www.
gov.ph/1960/01/25/carlos-p-garcia-
third-state-of-the-nation-address-
january-25-1960/.

[21] Patricio N. Abinales and Donna J.
Amoroso, State and Society in the
Philippines (Lanham, MD: Rowman &
Little Publishers, 2005), 182.

[22] Hazel M. McFerson, Mixed Blessing:
The Impact of the American Colonial
Experience on Politics and Society

in the Philippines (Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, 2002), 227.

[23] Alexander Cooley, Base Politics:
Dramatic Change and the U.S.

Military Overseas (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 2008), 68.

[24] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral

Almanac, 40.

[25] “History: Milestones in Corporate
Existence,” Landbank, accessed July
2, 2015, https://www.landbank.com/
history.

[26] “Manila Accord,” United Nations,
accessed July 2, 2015, https://treaties.
un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/
Volume%20550/volume-550-I-8029-
English.pdf.

[27] “History,” Cultural Center of the
Philippines, accessed July 2, 2015,
http://culturalcenter.gov.ph/about-the-
ccp/history/.

[28] “Lyndon B. Johnson: Manila Summit
Conference Documents, October 25,
1966,” The American Presidency
Project, accessed July 2, 2015,
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/
ws/?pid=27958.

[29] Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Official Calendar of
the Republic (Manila: PCDSPO, 2014),
27.

[30] Ibid., 177.

173

.Evolution of the
uirino Grandstand

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, COLINE ESTHER CARDENO, AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
69th Republic Day, July 4, 2015]

The Quirino Grandstand was once known
as the Independence Grandstand. It was
built as a permanent replacement for the
temporary grandstand built in front of the
Rizal Monument 111 in which the ceremonies
to mark Philippine independence were held
in July 4, 1946. 121 The ceremonies included
Manuel Roxas being sworn in as the first
President of the Third Republic, and it was
where the Philippine flag was raised to
fly alone for the first time on what is now
known as the Independence Flagpole. 131

The temporary grandstand was built in Rizal
Park because the Legislative Building was
in ruins and was considered too small for
the anticipated number of guests. 141 Roxas
took his first oath as the last President
of the Commonwealth in the Legislative
Building on May 28, 1946; it now stands as

the National Gallery of Art of the National
Museum.

Architect Juan Arellano was tasked to design
the temporary grandstand with a budget of
P120,000. The building was designed in the
neo-classical style, with a triumphal arch at
the center and two “wings” to provide shade
for the main galleries. In front of the arch
was a stage in the shape of a ship’s prow,

174

Legislative building

Manila Bay

| MAY 28, 1946 ^ LUNETA 1946

| JULY 4, 1946 LUNETA PRESENT DAY

PHOTO: A map showing the location of the original
Independence Grandstand and the current Quirino
Grandstand. The Legislative Building, in dark green
on the upper left, was in ruins. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

complete with a figurehead of a winged
maiden of victory holding the coat of arms
of the Commonwealth, to represent freedom.
Two 10-meter-tall figures of a Filipino and a
Filipina stood behind the stage in front of the
triumphal archd 51

After July 4, 1946, the first few independence
day ceremonies of the newly independent
Republic were held in temporary grandstands.
A rare color photograph shows the 1948
Independence Day ceremonies in Manila: a
temporary grandstand, much simpler than
the the one built in 1946, can be seen, this
time across from the Rizal Monument, which

« ■

PHOTO: Aerial view of the Independence
Ceremonies, Luneta, July 4, 1946. Photo courtesy of
Dr. Benito Legarda.

PHOTO: Independence Day parade on July 4,
1948. The Rizal Monument can be seen at the
left; dominating the photo is the Independence
Flagpole. Rightmost in the photo can be seen
the cream-colored temporary grandstand. Photo
courtesy of ITS @ Seattle Pacific Flickr account.

r 'a •

; -

' V *.pZ r -*•*' ...# 4 -

x ••

t *

n ;' ; " 1- p, St.-

■ -

means the dignitaries would have been facing
the Rizal Monument. This echoed previous
temporary grandstands built before the war
in what was then known as the New Luneta,
by the shore of Manila Bay, and facing the
Rizal Monument.

But the plan was to build a permanent
grandstand to serve as the focal point for the
rituals of the newly independent Republic.
Having succeeded to the presidency upon the
death of President Manuel Roxas in April
1948, President Elpidio Quirino ran for, and
won, a term of his own in the presidential

175

PHOTO: President Elpidio Quirino arrives for his
inaugural, December 30, 1949. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

elections of 1949. By the time Quirino was
inaugurated on December 30, 1949, the
new Grandstand had been built in what
used to be called the New Luneta, almost
exactly on the same spot where where, in
previous years, the Commonwealth had a
temporary grandstand for parades, facing
the Rizal Memorial and Roxas (then Dewey)
Boulevard. 161

Federico Ilustre, the chief architect at the
Bureau of Public Works, prepared the
design. Ilustre kept the triumphal arch from
Arellano’s design, but he did away with the
stage shaped like a ship’s prow and the two
statues! 71 The wings were also eliminated
from the design due to budget constraints,
although additions would be made to the
gallery with each succeeding presidential
inauguration! 81

The Independence Grandstand was later
renamed the Quirino Grandstand in honor
of Elpidio Quirino, the first president to be

inaugurated in the new venue! 911101 As early
as 1952, the Official Gazette has identified
the grandstand with President Quirino, 1111
but subsequent inaugural ceremonies in
1953 and 1957 called it the Independence
Grandstand. It was during President
Diosdado Macapagal’s Inaugural ceremony
on December 30, 1961 that it was referred
to, officially, as the Quirino Grandstand.

In line with Dr. Jose Rizal’s birth centennial,
the 1960s saw the rehabilitation of Rizal
Park and its surrounding areas, which had
become unkempt due to neglect. In 1964,
the National Parks Development Committee
was formed to give the whole of Luneta,
including the Quirino Grandstand, a modern
look! 121 The triumphal arch, which was
sinking and which was declared a hazard,
was removed! 131

The Quirino Grandstand became the
focal point for the rituals of the Republic.
From 1949, it was where Presidents were
inaugurated (1949, 1953, 1957, 1965, 1969,
1981, 1992, and 2010). It was where Vice-

176

’•*■«****«■

PHOTO: The Independence Grandstand ,
Independence Day, July 4, 1956, with Vice President
Richard Nixon as guest during the Magsaysay
administration. Photo courtesy of LIFE Magazine.

PHOTO: Funeral Mass for President Ramon
Magsaysay, Quirino Grandstand, Rizal Park, Manila,
March, 1957. Photo courtesy of the National Library
of the Philippines.

President Richard Nixon was a guest for
the Independence Day celebration on July 4,
1956 with President Ramon Magsaysay.

The Grandstand was where the funeral mass
for President Ramon Magsaysay, seventh
President of the Philippines, was held with
Archbishop of Manila Gabriel Reyes as the
officiant on March 22, 1957.

The LIFE Magazine photo of the Magsaysay
State Funeral explains the placement of the
Grandstand itself. It was built with two
important images in mind: the monument
of Rizal, and the Independence Flagpole,
symbols of the birth of a Filipino identity,
and the culmination of the campaign for
independence for the country (it is this vista,
and its symbolism, that has been recalled in
various speeches, including most recently, the
inaugural addresses of 2004 and 2010).

In June 1960, at the invitation of President
Carlos P. Garcia, Dwight D. Eisenhower
became the first President of the United
States to visit the Philippines while in office.
On June 16, Eisenhower gave a speech
during a civic reception at the Grandstand.
He was conferred the Order of Sikatuna with
the rank of Rajah. 1141

It was at the Grandstand where the first
June 12 Independence Day was celebrated
in 1962 during the presidency of Diosdado
Macapagal. The ceremony commenced
with a re-enactment of the declaration of
independence on June 12, 1898, in front of a
replica of the Aguinaldo House built in front
of the Quirino Grandstand. 1151

177

PHOTO: View of the Independence Grandstand
built during the Quirino administration, facing the
Rizal Monument. In front of the Grandstand is a
replica of Emilio Aguinaldo’s house, which was used
in the 1962 Independence Day celebration, when
June 12 was first observed as Independence Day.

By 1964 the government had decided to demolish
the central triumphal arch. Photo courtesy of
Skyscraper City.

President Ferdinand E. Marcos held three
of his inaugurations at the Grandstand: the
first on December 30, 1965; the second on
December 30, 1969; and the third June 30,
1981 when the New Republic (the fourth in
the roster of regimes of the Philippines) was
proclaimed.

The Independence Flagpole, which marked
the spot of the Independence Ceremony of
1946, was destroyed by a typhoon in the
1970s, and was later rebuilt. It was here
where the Philippine flag was lowered to half-
mast by the public, to mourn Senator Ninoy

PHOTO: President Diosdado Macapagal in front
of the Aguinaldo house replica at the Quirino
Grandstand, June 12, 1962. Photo courtesy of the
National Library of the Philippines.

PHOTO: Second inauguration of President
Ferdinand E. Marcos on December 30, 1969. Photo
courtesy of the Presidential Museum and Library.

Aquino and as an act of defiance against the
Marcos regime, as Aquino’s funeral cortege
slowly passed by the Rizal Monument on
August 31, 1983. 1161

178

■I

PHOTO: The original Independence Flagpole marked
where the Independence Ceremony took place. It
was subsequently rebuilt after it was destroyed in a
typhoon. Photo courtesy of LIFE Magazine.

PHOTO: President-elect Fidel V. Ramos takes his
oath as the 12th President of the Philippines in June
1992 with First Lady Amelita Ramos beside him. He
is sworn in by Chief Justice Andres Narvasa. Photo
taken from Simply Ming by Melandro T. Velasco.

It was at the Quirino Grandstand where
approximately two million people gathered
for the Tagumpay ng Bayan (Victory of the
People) rally on February 16, 1986. Corazon C.
Aquino, who led the rally, called for a boycott
of pro-Marcos newspapers and businesses. [17]

The inauguration of President Fidel V.
Ramos took place at Quirino Grandstand on
June 30, 1992, marking the first peaceful and
constitutional handover of power from one
administration to the next, since 1965. This
would be the last time a Philippine president
took their oath at Quirino Grandstand

PHOTO: President Joseph Ejercito Estrada arrives
at Quirino Grandstand for his Inaugural Address.
Photo taken from Joseph Estrada: The Millennium
President by Adrian E. Cristobal.

PHOTO: Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo waves as she arrives to her pre-inaugural
address at Rizal park in Manila June 30, 2004.
Photo courtesy of Reuters.

179

until the inaugural of Benigno S. Aquino
III in 2010. In 1998, to mark the Philippine
Centennial, President Joseph Ejercito Estrada
took his oath of office in Barasoain Church,
and after that, proceeded to the Quirino
Grandstand to deliver his inaugural address.
In 2004, President Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo
delivered her pre-inaugural address at the
Quirino Grandstand prior to proceeding to
Cebu City to take her oath of office in front
of the Cebu Provincial Capitol.

On June 30, 2010, even when the building
was in bad shape and had to be retrofitted.
President Benigno S. Aquino III returned to
tradition: he took his oath and delivered his
inaugural address in the Quirino Grandstand.

The Quirino Grandstand has also been used
for religious celebrations. In January 15,
1995, it was the main venue for the World
Youth Day celebrated by Pope John Paul
II, attended by approximately four million
Filipinos and participants from more than
thirty countries all over the world. The event
was considered the “biggest papal crowd
ever assembled” in history. 1181 This was also
the event that popularized the song “Tell the
World of His Love.” 1191

Twenty years after Pope John Paul IPs visit,
the Grandstand was visited by another
pope: Pope Francis said his closing mass at
Quirino Grandstand on January 18, 2015. 1201
The mass was attended by approximately six
million peopled 211

While our independence day has changed,
and we have had three constitutions and three
different regimes, the Quirino Grandstand
has endured, serving the purpose for which

PHOTO: President Benigno S. Aquino III takes his
oath before Supreme Court Associate Justice
Conchita Carpio-Morales as the Philippines 15th
President during inaugural ceremony at the Quirino
Grandstand, Rizal Park in Manila, June 30, 2010.
Photo courtesy of Malacanang Photo Bureau.

PHOTO: Pope John Paul M’s helicopter flies January
15, 1995 over the huge crowd in Manila’s Rizal
Park prior to celebration of an open-air mass to
an estimated crowd of over two-million people
gathered for the 10th World Youth Day congress.
Photo courtesy of Jun Dagmang/AFP.

PHOTO: Pope Francis leads the holy mass at the
Quirino Grandstand in Manila Sunday, (January 18,
2015) where an estimated six (6) million people
attended. (Photo courtesy of Lauro Montellano Jr. /
Ryan Lim/Malacanang Photo Bureau)

180

it was built: a concrete memorialization of a
particular period of time — the independence
of the Philippines achieved in 1946 — and
as the focal point, with its vista of the Rizal
Monument and the Independence Flagpole,
of the narrative arc of our journey to
nationhood; and as a durable and versatile
platform for the projection of secular and
sacred events.

ENDNOTES

[1J “The Centenary of the Rizal

Monument,” Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines, accessed
July 2, 2015, http://www.gov.ph/rizal-
monument/.

[2] Paulo G. Alacazaren, Parks for a

Nation: The Rizal Park and 50 Years
of the National Parks Development
Committee (Quezon City: Media Wise
Communications Inc, 2013), 108.

[3] “The Centenary of the Rizal

Monument,” http://www.gov.ph/rizal-
monument/.

[4] Paulo G. Alcazaren, “Grandstands and

grand public places,” The Philippine
Star, July 10, 2010, accessed July 2,
2015, http://www.philstar.com/modern-
living/591489/grandstands-and-grand-
public-spaces.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Alcazaren, Parks for a Nation, 109.

[7] Alcazaren, “Grandstands and grand

public places,” accessed July 2, 2015,
http://www.philstar.com/modern-
living/591489/grandstands-and-grand-
public-spaces.

[8] Alcazaren, Parks for a Nation, 109.

[9] Euden Valdez, “A witness to spiritual

and patriotic marvels,” Manila Times,

January 17, 2015, accessed July
2, 2015, http://www.manilatimes.
net/witness-spiritual-patriotic-
marvels/156086/.

[10] “The Protocol, Ceremony, History,
and Symbolism of the Presidential
Inauguration,” Presidential Museum
and Library, accessed July 2, 2015,
http://malacanang.gov.ph/1608-
the-protocol-ceremony-history-
and-symbolism-of-the-presidential-
inauguration/.

[11] Official Gazette of the Republic
Philippines, October 1952, 128.

[12] Alcazaren, Parks for a Nation, 109.

[13] Alcazaren, “Grandstands and
grand public places,” http://www.
philstar.com/modern-living/591489/
grandstands-and-grand-public-spaces.

[14] General Services Administration,
National Archives and Records Service,
and Office of the Federal Register,
Public Papers of the Presidents of the
United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower,
1960-1961: Containing the Public
Messages, Speeches, and Statements

of the President, January 1, 1960 to
January 20, 1961 (Washington, D.C.:
United States Government Publishing
Office, 1999), 495-499.

[15] American Historical Association,
Bulletin 1-3 (1972): 20, accessed
July 2, 2015, https://books. google,
com.ph/books ?ei=axSWVeb_
EdGE8gXonqr4BQ8dd=
9awuAQAAIAAJ &dq=reenactment+
aguinaldo+house+june +12+
1962&focus=search within volume&
q=replica+home+kawit.

[16] “The Centenary of the Rizal
Monument,” http://www.gov.ph/rizal-

181

monument/.

[17] Mark R. Thompson, The Anti-
Marcos Struggle: Personalistic Rule
and Democratic Transition in the
Philippines (Quezon City: New Day
Publishing, 1996), 154.

[18] Giselle Vincett and Elijah Obinna,
Christianity in the Modern World:
Changes and Controversies (Surrey:
Ashgate Publishing, 2014), 14.

[19] Ibid.

[20] “The Papal Visit PH Itinerary: January
15-19, 2015,” Papal Visit to the
Philippines 2015, accessed July 2,
2015, http://papalvisit.ph/the-papal-
visit-itinerary/.

[21] ‘“6 to 7 million’ attend Pope Francis
Mass in Manila,” Rappler, January 18,
2015, accessed July 2, 2015, http://
www.rappler.com/specials/pope-
francis-ph/81229-pope-francis-mass-
luneta-rizal-park.

182

ublic

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
69th Republic Day, July 4, 2015]

PHOTO: July 4, 1946: In ceremonies held in the
temporary Independence Grandstand (built in front
of the Rizal Monument), the Philippine flag is raised
while the United States flag is lowered. The flagpole
in front of the Rizal Monument is thus known as
the Independence Flagpole, commemorating the
culmination of the quest for national independence.
Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum and
Library.

I. INTRODUCTION

On July 4, 1946, the United States formally
recognized the independence of the Republic
of the Philippines. This was the culmination
of the process that began in 1916, when the
Jones Law pledged the eventual recognition of
Philippine independence, and the Philippine
Independence (or the Tydings-McDuffie)
Act of 1934, which provided for a ten-year
transitional period toprepareforindependence.
The independence of the Philippines was
marked by Manuel Roxas retaking his oath
as President of the Philippines, eliminating
the pledge of allegiance to the United States
required prior to independence. Independence
thereafter was celebrated on July 4th of every
year until 1962.

II. INDEPENDENCE OF THE PHILIPPINES
FROM THE UNITED STATES

On May 28, 1946, President Sergio

Osmena descended the stairs of the Palace
accompanied by the President-elect Manuel
Roxas — marking the formal act of leaving
office for the incumbent. The President-

183

elect then symbolically marked the start of
his presidency by climbing the same stairs
later in the day, an act which, according
to President Manuel L. Quezon, was “a
constant reminder to every president of the
portion of the oath of office which pledges
justice to every man.”

Later, in a temporary structure built in front of
the ruins of the Legislative Building destroyed
in the battle for the liberation of Manila,
President Manuel Roxas took his oath as the
third president of the Commonwealth of the
Philippines, still under the sovereignty of the
United States. He delivered his first inaugural
address, in which he said:

Our appointment with destiny is upon us.
In five weeks, we will be a free Republic.
Our noble aspirations for nationhood, long
cherished and arduously contended for by our
people, will be realized. We will enter upon a
new existence in which our individual lives will
form together a single current, recognized
and identified in the ebb and flow of world
events as distinctly Filipino.

On July 4, 1 946, pursuant to the provisions of
the Tydings-McDuffie Law or the Philippine
Independence Act, the Commonwealth of
the Philippines became the Republic of the
Philippines — the Third Republic. It was on
this date that the United States of America
formally recognized the independence of the
Philippines and withdrew its sovereignty
over the country. In ceremonies held at the
Independence Grandstand (a temporary
structure built in front of the Rizal
Monument), the flag of America was lowered
and the Philippine flag was raised to fly alone
over the country.

PHOTO: May 28, 1946: President Sergio Osmena
is accompanied by President-elect Manuel Roxas,
as they descend the staircase of the Malacanan
Palace from the Reception Hall, a tradition of
the Philippine presidency. Photo courtesy of the
National Library of the Philippines.

The independence of the Philippines — and
the inauguration of its Third Republic — was
marked by Manuel Roxas re-taking his oath,
eliminating the pledge of allegiance to the
United States of America which was required
prior to independence, this time as the first
President of the Republic of the Philippines.
The Congress of the Commonwealth then
became the First Congress of the Republic,
and international recognition was finally
achieved as governments entered into treaties
with the new republic.

From Blue Book of the First Year of the
Republic:

The Philippine flag, its red bar below the blue
in token of beneficent and dearly bought
peace at last, began to wave in the sweeping
wind. The wind came in swift, low gusts...
From the west came a rain-laden gale. And
the long, slender crystal threads came down
from the gray, white masses in the sky, as if
to unravel the blending, shifting, immaterial
fleece. And the rain blended with our tears—
tears of joy, of gratitude, and of pride in

184

Sfjry h\ \

PHOTO: The Philippine flag flies alone in Philippine skies, July 4, 1946. Photo colorized by the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

supreme accomplishment. Above us flew
for the first time and over this embattled
land, alone, happy, and unperturbed amidst
sweeping gales and whipping rain— the flag of
the Philippines.

III. INDEPENDENCE DAY MOVED FROM
JULY 4 TO JUNE 12

In 1962, President Diosdado Macapagal
issued Proclamation No. 28, effectively
moving the date of Philippine independence
from July 4 to June 12 — the date
independence from Spain was proclaimed in
Emilio Aguinaldo’s home in Kawit, Cavite.
In his proclamation, President Macapagal
cited “the establishment of the Philippine
Republic by the Revolutionary Government
under General Emilio Aguinaldo on June 12,
1898, marked our people’s declaration and
exercise of their right to self-determination,
liberty and independence.”

President Macapagal adopted the view of
historians and many political leaders, that
the foundation date of the nation should be
June 12, since July 4 was the restoration of
that independence.

Moreover, the move was made in the
context of the rejection of the U.S. House
of Representatives on the proposed $73
million additional war reparation bill for the
Philippines on May 28, 1962. The rejection,
according to President Macapagal, caused
“indignation among the Filipinos” and a “loss
of American good will in the Philippines.” 111
He explained that he deemed it the right time
to push the change of the independence date,
a political move he was planning even before
his ascent to the presidency.

I decided to effect the change of independence
day at that time not as an act of resentment
but as a judicious choice of timing for the
taking of an action which had previously been
decided upon. [2]

Prior to the moving of the date of Philippine
independence, June 12 was celebrated as
Flag Day, a holiday originally observed in
October, since 1919, when the Philippine
Flag was once again permitted to be
displayed. In 1941, June 12 became Flag Day,
in recognition of the importance of June 12
when independence was proclaimed, and the
national flag and anthem formally presented
to the Filipino people. Thereafter, June 12
was Flag Day until 1962.

Meanwhile, Congress had not yet approved
the measure by statute. Representative Ramon
Mitra Sr. had been pushing for the House to
approve the June 12 Independence Day Bill.
The bill was authored by Representative

Mitra and Rep. Justiniano Montano.
President Macapagal also spoke with Senator
Gerardo “Gerry” Roxas, son of President
Manuel Roxas. Macapagal was concerned
that the Senator might be “lukewarm”
towards the bill since the “historical focus
on the first Presidency of the Republic may
shift from Roxas to Aguinaldo.” Apparently,
the delay was not caused by ill-feelings but
rather, out of the desire of some legislators
to retain some significance for July 4. A
compromise was reached in which Congress
decided to include a provision in the bill
making July 4 “Republic Day.”

Thereafter, in 1964, the Congress of the
Philippines passed Republic Act No. 4166,
formally designating June 12 of every year
as the date of Philippine independence. The
date commemorates the anniversary of the
Proclamation of Philippine Independence,
because the date remains the foundation
date for the modern, independent Republic
of the Philippines and of our independent
nationhood, as recognized by the world
community. At the same time, July 4 was
designated as Republic Day, the foundation
date for our modern, independent republic.
From 1964 until 1984, Philippine Republic
Day was celebrated as a national holiday.

IV. FROM PHILIPPINE-AMERICAN
FRIENDSHIP DAY TO REPUBLIC DAY

The origin of Philippine-American Friendship
Day dates to 1955, when President Ramon
Magsaysay, by virtue of Proclamation No.
212, s. 1955, established the observance of
“Philippine American Day.” The following
year, by virtue of Proclamation No. 363, s.
1956, the celebration became a yearly event.

186

Sometime during the Marcos administration,
Philippine-American Day was renamed
Philippine-American Friendship Day
and moved to July 4, overshadowing the
observance of the date as Republic Day.
Since the Third Republic and the 1935
Constitution were discarded by Martial
Law, it was impolitic to remind the public
of the old republic. This is why, when
President Marcos issued Proclamation No.
2346 s. 1984, reference was made only to
Philippine-American Friendship Day, which
was relegated to a working holiday.

During the administration of President
Corazon C. Aquino, the practice of
celebrating Philippine-American Friendship
Day and Philippine Republic Day as a non-
working holiday was formally abolished.
The Administrative Code of 1987 specified
a list of non-working holidays that did not
include July 4.

In 1996, President Fidel V. Ramos would
once again commemorate the anniversary
of Republic Day through Proclamation No.
811, s. 1996, not with a holiday but with
public celebrations to commemorate 50
years of independence. On June 12, however,
the country observes the anniversary of the
proclamation of the independence that was
lost after the defeat of the First Republic,
and restored in 1946. That is why as of
July 4, 2015, the Philippines has been an
independent nation for sixty-nine years.

PHOTO: During the inauguration of the Third
Republic, President Manuel Roxas shakes the hand
of General Douglas MacArthur of the United States,
then the Supreme Commander for the Allied
Powers (SCAP), July 4, 1946. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

ENDNOTES

[1J Diosdado Macapagal, A Stone for
the Edifice : Memoirs of a President
(Quezon City: Mac Publishing Flouse,
1968), 248.

[2] Ibid., 249.

187

Mystery Solved

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION AND CHEREY ANN MAE BIGAY

Legislative building Ta f,

Avenue

Destroy**! during
? Liberation

AGRIFIIMA circle

jJfc-Maria Orosa St

National Library

Rizal Monuments

Destroyed by the

Japanese Army

Manila Hotel

Independence

Grandstand

Quirino Grandstand

Manila Bay

| MAY 28. 1946 ^ LUNETA 1946
| JULY 4. 1946 LUNETA PRESENT DAY

PHOTO: The May 28 event was held in front of the
ruins of the Legislative Building. Seen in the first
photo is the side view of the Manila City Hall, in close
proximity to where the site of Legislative Building is.
Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
69th Republic Day, July 4, 2015]

VISUAL COMPARISONS ON TWO
INAUGURATIONS

President Manuel Roxas had two
inaugurations, occasions wherein he took his
oath of office: one on May 28, 1946 as third
and last president of the Commonwealth of
the Philippines, and another one, on July
4, 1946, as president of the independent
Republic of the Philippines, known as the
Third Republic. The photos of these two
distinct events are often confused together.
In order to distinguish the two events, the
Presidential Communications Development
and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO) has
identified distinct elements in each of the two
events:

188

A. LOCATION

The May 28 Inauguration Ceremony and the
July 4 Independence Ceremony were held on
two distinct locations.

The May 28 event was held in front of the
ruins of the Legislative Building. Seen in the
first photo is the side view of the Manila City
Hall, in close proximity to where the site of
Legislative Building is (see figure 1).

On the other hand, the July 4 Independence
ceremonies was held in Luneta, as evidenced by
the aerial view photo of the event above, where
the Rizal Monument is encircled (see figure 2).

B. PRESIDENT MANUEL ROXAS’ NECKTIE

It can be gleaned from the two events that
President Roxas wore two different neckties, as
evidenced by these photos (see figures 3 and 4).

189

C. CHAIR USED AND SEATING
ARRANGEMENT

Noticeable also were the type of chairs
used in the two events. In terms of seating
arrangement, on the May 28 Inaugural, Vice
President Elpidio Quirino and U.S. High
Commissioner Paul V. McNutt flanked First
Lady Trinidad de Leon Roxas (see figure 5).
On the July 4 event, Vice President Quirino
sat beside McNutt (see figure 6).

D. GUESTS

The guests present at the May 28 inaugural
were not the same ones as those present in
the July 4 Independence ceremonies (see
figure 7). General Douglas MacArthur, then
the Supreme Commander for the Allied
Powers, was invited, but only came on July
4, 1946. The same goes with U.S. Senator
Millard Tydings, the co-author of the
Tydings-McDuffie Law that set the date for
the independence of the Philippines from the
United States. He was also present in the July
4 ceremonies, but was absent on the May
28 Inaugural (see figure 8). Former United
States High Commissioner and first United
States Ambassador Paul V. McNutt was
present in both events.

190

E. GRANDSTAND DESIGN

The grandstand used on the May 28
inauguration featured the coat of arms of
the Commonwealth of the Philippines (with
the American Eagle on top) (see figure 9),
while the platform used in the Independence
ceremonies of July 4, shaped like a prow of
a ship, had a statue of the winged goddess
of Victory on the prow, holding the Coat of
Arms of the Commonwealth but without the
American eagle surmounting it (the design
for the coat of arms for the republic was only
agreed on shortly before independence day
itself) (see figure 10).

F. MEDALS

The design of the medals for the two events
also differ. Above are the actual photos of the
medals worn during the May 28 inauguration
(an inaugural medal) (see figure 11 and 13)
and the July 4 independence ceremonies
(independence day medal) (see figure 12
and 13). We have also featured photos of
attendees wearing the medals.

191

FIGURE 13. Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Museum and Library.

FIGURE 15. Photo from the Presidential Museum
and Library Collection.

G. FIRST LADY TRINIDAD ROXAS’ DRESS

It is also noticeable that Mrs. Trinidad de
Leon-Roxas wore two different ternos on the
two events, as evidenced by the photos above
(see figure 14).

H. THE WATER PITCHER

Another distinguishing item is the presence
of the water pitcher and an upside down
cup on the podium of the Independence
Grandstand on July 4 (see figure 16). This
was not present on the podium of the May
28 inauguration (see figure 15).

192

Declaration of Martial Law

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, JOSELITO ARCINAS, COLINE ESTHER CARDENO,
AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

Sunday HEx press IQ

FM DECLARES
MARTIAL LAW

The nat'l
situation
in brief

But civilian gov’t
still functions; no
military takeover

•To ton the Republic
and form a new nocirly *

Nation 1$ calm; but Inatt, Ufa go on normally

PHOTO: “FM Declares Martial Law’’— the headline of the
September 24, 1972 issue of the Sunday Express, which was
the Sunday edition of Philippines Daily Express. The Daily
Express was the only newspaper allowed to circulate upon the
declaration of Martial Law. Photo courtesy of Sunday Express.

[This essay was originally published
on the Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines website to
commemorate the 43rd anniversary
of the Declaration of Martial Law,
September 23, 2015]

THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE
DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW
IS ON SEPTEMBER 23
(NOT SEPTEMBER 21)

President Ferdinand E. Marcos
signed Proclamation No. 1081 on
September 21, 1972, placing the
Philippines under Martial Law.
Some sources say that Marcos signed
the proclamation on September 17
or on September 22 — but, in either
case, the document itself was dated
September 21.

Throughout the Martial Law period,
Marcos built up the cult of September

193

21, proclaiming it as National Thanksgiving
Day by virtue of Proclamation No. 1180 s.
1973 to memorialize the date as the foundation
day of his New Society. The propaganda effort
was so successful that up to the present, many
Filipinos — particularly those who did not live
through the events of September 23, 1972 —
labor under the misapprehension that martial
law was proclaimed on September 21, 1972.
It was not.

THE CULMINATION OF A LONG PERIOD
OF PREPARATION

The facts are clear. A week before the actual
declaration of Martial Law, a number of
people had already received information that
Marcos had drawn up a plan to completely
take over the government and gain absolute
rule. Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr., on
September 13, 1972, during a privilege
speech, exposed what was known as “Oplan
Sagittarius.” Senator Aquino said he had
received a top-secret military plan given by
President Marcos himself to place Metro
Manila and outlying areas under the control
of the Philippine Constabulary as a prelude
to Martial Law. President Marcos was
going to use a series of bombings in Metro
Manila, including the 1971 Plaza Miranda
bombing, as a justification for his takeover
and subsequent authoritarian rule.

In his own diary, Marcos wrote on September
14, 1972 that he informed the military that
he would proceed with proclaiming Martial
Law. Even the United States Embassy in
Manila knew as early as September 17, 1972
about Marcos’ plan. 111

This was indeed the culmination of a long
period of preparation: As early as May
17, 1969, Marcos hinted the declaration
of Martial Law, when he addressed the
Philippine Military Academy Alumni
Association:

One of my favorite mental exercises, which
others may find useful, is to foresee possible
problems one may have to face in the future
and to determine what solutions can possibly
be made to meet these problems.

For instance, if I were suddenly asked, to pose
a given situation, to decide in five minutes
when and where to suspend the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus, I have decided that
there should be at least five questions that I
would ask, and depending on the answers to
these five questions, I would know when and
where to suspend the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus.

The same thing is true with the declaration of
martial law [...] It is a useful mental exercise to
meet a problem before it happens.

In his memoir, then Justice Secretary Juan
Ponce Enrile recalled that on a late afternoon
in December 1969, Marcos instructed him
to study the powers of the President as
Commander-in-Chief under the provisions
of the 1935 Constitution. Marcos made this
instruction as he “[foresaw] an escalation
of violence and disorder in the country and
[wanted] to know the extent of his powers
as commander-in-chief.” PI President Marcos
also stressed that “the study must be done
discreetly and confidentially.” [3]

194

At about the same time, Marcos also instructed
Executive Secretary Alejandro Melchor and
Jose Almonte to study how Martial Law
was implemented in different parts of the
world. Marcos also wanted to know the
consequences of declaring Martial Law.
The result of their study stated that, “while
Martial Law may accelerate development,
in the end the Philippines would become
a political archipelago, with debilitating,
factionalized politics.” Almonte recalled that
their findings led to the conclusion that “the
nation would be destroyed because, apart
from the divisiveness it would cause, Martial
Law would offer Marcos absolute power
which would corrupt absolutely.” 141

By the end of January 1970, Enrile, with
the help of Efren Plana and Minerva
Gonzaga Reyes, submitted the only copy of
the confidential report on the legal nature
and extent of Martial Law to Marcos. A
week later, Marcos summoned Enrile and
instructed him to prepare the documents to
implement Martial Law in the Philippines. 151

In his January 1971 diary entries, Marcos
discussed how he met with business leaders,
intellectuals from the University of the
Philippines, and the military to lay the
groundwork that extreme measures would
be needed in the future. On May 8, 1972,
Marcos confided in his diary that he had
instructed the military to update its plans,
including the list of personalities to be
arrested, and had met with Enrile to finalize
the legal paperwork required.

On August 1, 1972, Marcos met with Enrile
and a few of his most trusted military
commanders to discuss tentative dates for

the declaration of Martial Law — to fall
within the next two months. All of the dates
they considered either ended in seven or were
divisible by seven, as Marcos considered
seven his lucky number. 161

THE LAST DAYS OF DEMOCRACY

On September 21, 1972, democracy was
still functioning in the Philippines. Senator
Benigno S. Aquino Jr. was still able to deliver
a privilege speech — what would be his
final one — in the Senate. Primitivo Mijares,

Last photo of Ninoy
Aquino in the Senate,
taken September 21,
.1972, a day before his

arrest

PHOTO: Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr. delivers
a speech in the Senate on September 21, 1972-
two days before Martial Law was declared and
implemented. Photo courtesy of A Garrison State in
the Make, p. 353.

195

among others, recounted the functioning of
the House of Representatives and the Senate,
with committee meetings scheduled for that
night. Senate and House leaders agreed not
to adjourn on this day, as earlier scheduled.
They decided to extend their special session
to a sine die adjournment on September 23. [7]

That afternoon, a protest march in Plaza
Miranda was sponsored by the Concerned
Christians for Civil Liberties. The rally was
attended by more than 30 “civic, religious,
labor, student, and activist groups [...] [and]
a crowd of 30,000,” and received coverage
from newspapers, radio, and television. 181

In his diary, Marcos wrote that he, together
with members of his Cabinet and staff,
finished the preparation of Proclamation
1081 at 8:00 p.m., September 21.

On September 22, 1972, a day after the
final speech of Senator Aquino, newspapers
still came out: they featured the rally held

Photo from Ninoy: The Willing Martyr.

Benigno S. “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. was a prominent
Philippine journalist and politician. As a reporter
for the Manila Times, Ninoy became the youngest
correspondent during the Korean War and was
awarded the Philippine Legion of Honor with
the Rank of Officer for his service in reporting
the condition of the Philippine troops during
the dispute. [1] In 1954, Ninoy was awarded his
second Philippine Legion of Honor award with the
Rank of Commander, the highest distinction the
government could confer to a civilian, for his vital
role as negotiator, in the surrender of Huk leader
Luis Taruc. [2] By the age of 22, Ninoy Aquino
was elected Mayor of Concepcion, Tarlac (1955-
1959). In 1959, Ninoy served as Vice-Governor
of Tarlac and in 1961, at the age of 28, became
the youngest Governor of the province. [3] He also
served as executive assistant to three Presidents:
Ramon Magsaysay, Carlos P. Garcia, and Diosdado
Macapagal. [4] During the 1967 elections, Ninoy
Aquino, became the only victor of the Liberal
Party to the Senate. [5]

As a senator of the 7th Congress, he was a major
political rival of President Ferdinand Marcos. In
his numerous speeches in the Senate, Aquino
urged for the abolition of special privileges and
denounced corruption in the government. [6]

196

Photo from Ninoy: Ideals & Idealogies 1932-1983.

On the night before Marcos publicly announced
Martial Law, Aquino was one of the first of 8,000
people to be arrested. [7]

Aquino was put through military trial, charged
with murder, illegal possession of firearms,
and subversion. C8] He endured seven years of
incarceration before he was allowed to seek
medical treatment in the United States for a heart
condition. After three years in exile, he returned
to Manila, but was gunned down before he could
set foot on the tarmac. His assassination started a
chain of events that would eventually lead to the
EDSA People Power Revolution of 1986.

Aquino was survived by his wife, Corazon C.
Aquino; his four daughters; and his son, Benigno
S. Aquino III. Republic Act No. 2956, signed into
law in 2004, declared August 21 of every year
as “Ninoy Aquino Day,” a national non-working
holiday, in order to commemorate Aquino’s death
anniversary.

the previous day in Plaza Miranda. Mijares
recounted that Marcos was agitated by a
statement reported in the Daily Express that
if Martial Law were declared, Aquino said
he would have to be arrested soon after or he
would escape to join the resistance.

THE ENRILE AMBUSH AS PRETEXT FOR
MARTIAL LAW

The pretext for Martial Law was provided
later in the evening of Friday, September
22, 1972, the convoy of Secretary of
Defense Juan Ponce Enrile was ambushed in
Wack-Wack as he was on his way home to
Dasmarinas Village in Makati before 9:00
p.m. Enrile recalled his convoy was driving
out of Camp Aguinaldo when a car opened
fire at his convoy and sped away.

A contrasting account came from Oscar
Lopez, who lived along Notre Dame Street,
Wack Wack Village, stated that he heard a
lot of shooting and that when he went out
to see what was happening, he saw an empty
car riddled with bullets. Lopez’s driver, who
happened to see the incident, narrated that
“there was a car that came and stopped
beside a Meralco post. Some people got out
of the car, and then there was another car
that came by beside it and started riddling
it with bullets to make it look like it was
ambushed.” [9]

This ambush, as Enrile later revealed in 1986,
was staged by Marcos to justify Martial Law.

President Marcos, in his diary entry for
September 22, 1972 (time-stamped 9:55
p.m.) wrote, “Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile was
ambushed near Wack-Wack at about 8:00

197

■f.SV <J>»-

i33i.
I'fTi-

MALACA*IAN PALACE

^ ul^MUaJL 4

s-a-S- 4 .“*•

ooA- <la <*- AaSfiLi.^— *

C^. JLa. 4» *-JaL ■—-«•- •"

■*> T- fcf Gi£

aMafl "t A t

oil!. aliUL-a*. •tf-

d ■ 'Ijl^ J£- 1 -

H^[Mr_J3 A? m* <*-»_& «-k

kA»- - ^

.rC^, £»* ^- A

iC. i JU~"k. wsW^

QvuJUU <*aa^*P. d n -. e> t) - ’ (f*^ *-i ^ 2i*I2^.
A JM- *>*4 C«. 'A. t -Eau 'ttf Mi. •M.
jl^ M-i «» >* ju u .

PHOTO: Excerpt from the diary of Ferdinand E.
Marcos on September 22, 1972. Photo courtesy of
the Philippine Diary Project.

p.m. tonight. It was a good thing he was riding
in his security car as a protective measure[...J
This makes the martial law proclamation a
necessity.” His diary entry for September 25,
1972 mentions conditions after two days of
Martial Law, also indicating martial law in
reality is dated to September 23, 1972.

1972 — was used to connect the ambush with
alleged Communist terror attacks.

In the biography of Chino Roces, Vergel
Santos questioned the elements of the Enrile
ambush: “Why inside a village and not on
a public street, and why in that particular
village? Possibly for easier stage-managing:
the family of Enrile’s sister Irma and her
husband, Dr. Victor Potenciano, lived there,
in Fordham, the next street in the Potenciano
home and got the story straight from him, as
officially scripted.” [11]

SEPTEMBER 21 OR SEPTEMBER 23?

When Marcos appeared on television at 7:15
p.m. on September 23, 1972 to announce that
he had placed the “entire Philippines under
Martial Law” by virtue of Proclamation
No. 1081, he framed his announcement in
legalistic terms that were untrue. This helped
camouflage the true nature of his act to this
day: it was nothing less than a self-coup.

President Marcos announced that he had
placed the entire country under Martial Law
as of 9:00 p.m. on September 22, 1972 via a
proclamation which, he claimed, he’d signed
on September 21, 1972.

Primitivo Mijares — a former journalist
for Marcos who would later write against
Marcos and disappear without a trace in
1973 — claimed that the Enrile ambush was
fake as it was made as the final excuse for
Marcos to declare Martial Law. [10] Mijares
also claimed that the ammunition planted by
the Presidential Guard Battalion in Digoyo
Point, Isabela — which was later confiscated
by the Philippine Constabulary on July 5,

Yet accounts differ. David Rosenberg,
writing in the Bulletin of Concerned Asian
Scholars (“The End of the Freest Press in the
World,” Vol. 5, 1973) chronicled that about
six hours after the ambush, Marcos signed
Proclamation No. 1081, placing the entire
country under Martial Law, placing the
signing at around 3:00 a.m. on September
23. Raymond Bonner, in his book Waltzing
with the Dictator, narrated his interview

198

with Enrile, during which the former
Defense Secretary recalled that he and Acting
Executive Secretary Roberto Reyes witnessed
Marcos sign Proclamation No. 1081 in
the morning of September 23, 1972. The
Bangkok Post asserted in a series of articles
called “The Aquino Papers,” published from
February 20 to 22 of 1 973, that Proclamation
No. 1081 had been signed even earlier, on
September 17, 1972, postdated to September
21. Mijares also mentioned in his book that
Marcos said as much in an address to a
conference of historians, in January 1973.

Two things emerge: first, whether they
conflict or not, all accounts indicate that
Marcos’ obsession with numerology
(particularly the number seven) necessitated
that Proclamation No. 1081 be officially
signed on a date that was divisible by seven.
Thus, September 21, 1972 became the official
date that Martial Law was established and
the day that the Marcos dictatorship began.
This also allowed Marcos to control history
on his own terms.

DAY ONE OF THE MARCOS DICTATORSHIP

The second is that the arbitrary date
emphasizes that the actual date for Martial
Law was not the numerologically-auspicious
(for Marcos) 21st, but rather, the moment
that Martial Law was put into full effect,
which was after the nationwide address of
President Ferdinand E. Marcos as far as the
nation was concerned: September 23, 1972.
By then, personalities considered threats
to President Marcos (Senators Benigno S.
Aquino Jr., Jose Diokno, Francisco Rodrigo,
and Ramon Mitra Jr., and members of the
media such as Joaquin Roces, Teodoro

Locsin Sr., Maximo Soliven and Amando
Doronila) had already been rounded up,
starting with the arrest of Senator Aquino
at midnight of September 22, and going into
the early morning hours of September 23,
when 100 of the 400 personalities targeted
for arrest were already detained in Camp
Crame by 4:00 a.m.

In the meantime, the military had shut down
mass media, flights were canceled, and
incoming overseas calls were prohibited.
Press Secretary Francisco Tatad went on air
at 3:00 p.m. of September 23 to read the
text of Proclamation No. 1081. The reading
of the proclamation was followed by
Marcos going on air at 7:15 p.m. to justify
the massive clampdown of democratic
institutions in the country.

Marcos would subsequently issue General
Order No. 1, s. 1972, transferring all powers
to the President who was to rule by decree.

The New York Times reported about these
events in an article titled “Mass Arrests and
Curfew Announced in Philippines; Mass
Arrests Ordered in Philippines” in their
September 24, 1972 issue. The Daily Express
itself announced in its September 24 issue
that Marcos had proclaimed martial law the
day before, September 23, 1972.

“NEVER AGAIN”

After the declaration and imposition
of Martial Law, citizens would still go
on to challenge the constitutionality of
Proclamation No. 1081. Those arrested filed
petitions for habeas corpus with the Supreme
Court. But Marcos, who had originally

199

announced that Martial Law would not
supersede the 1935 Constitution, engineered
the replacement of the constitution with a
new one. On March 31, 1973, the Supreme
Court issued its final decision in Javellana
v. Executive Secretary, which essentially
validated the 1973 Constitution. This would
be the final legitimizing decision with on the
constitutionality of Martial Law: in G.R. No.
L-35546 of September 17, 1974, the Supreme
Court dismissed petitions for habeas corpus
by ruling that Martial Law was a political
question beyond the jurisdiction of the court;
and that, furthermore, the court had already
deemed the 1973 Constitution in full force
and effect, replacing the 1935 Constitution.

Martial Law would officially end on January
17, 1981 with Proclamation No. 2045.
Marcos, however, would reserve decree-
making powers for himself.

Today, the 1987 Constitution safeguards our
institutions from a repeat of Marcos’ Martial
Law regime. The Supreme Court is empowered
to review all official acts to determine if there
has been grave abuse of discretion. Congress
cannot be padlocked. Martial Law is limited
in duration and effects, even if contemplated
by a president. Section 18 of Article VII of the
current Constitution provides:

Within forty-eight hours from the
proclamation of martial law or the suspension
of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus,
the President shall submit a report in person
or in writing to the Congress. The Congress,
voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority
of all its Members in regular or special session,
may revoke such proclamation or suspension,
which revocation shall not be set aside by the

President. Upon the initiative of the President,
the Congress may, in the same manner, extend
such proclamation or suspension for a period
to be determined by the Congress, if the
invasion or rebellion shall persist and public
safety requires it.

The Congress, if not in session, shall, within
twenty-four hours following such proclamation
or suspension, convene in accordance with its
rules without any need of a call.

The Supreme Court may review, in an
appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen,
the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
proclamation of martial law or the suspension
of the privilege of the writ or the extension
thereof, and must promulgate its decision
thereon within thirty days from its filing.

A state of martial law does not suspend the
operation of the Constitution, nor supplant
the functioning of the civil courts or legislative
assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies
over civilians where civil courts are able to
function, nor automatically suspend the
privilege of the writ.

200

ENDNOTES

(DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW)

[1J Raymond Bonner, Waltzing with a
Dictator: The Marcoses and the
Making of American Policy (New York,
NY: Times Books, 1987), 3.

[2] Juan Ponce Enrile, Jnan Ponce Emile:

A Memoir (Quezon City: ABS-CBN
Publishing, 2012), 275.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Jose T. Almonte and Marites Danguilan

Vitug, Endless Journey: A Memoir
(Quezon City: Cleverheads Publishing,
2015), 77.

[5] Enrile, Juan Ponce Enrile, 276.

[6] Bonner, Waltzing with a Dictator, 95.

[7] Primitivo Mijares, The Conjugal

Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda
Marcos I. (New York, NY: Union
Square Publications, 1986), 54.

[8] Eva-Lotta E. Hedman and John Thayer

Sidel, Philippine Politics and Society
in the Twentieth Century: Colonial
Legacies, Post- Colonial Trajectories
(London: Routledge, 2005), 129.

[9] Raul Rodrigo, Phoenix: The Saga of the

Lopez Family Volume 1: 1800 - 1972,
Manila: Eugenio Lopez Foundation,
Inc., 2007), 377.

[10] Mijares, The Conjugal Dictatorship,
166.

[11] Vergel O. Santos, Chino and His Time,
(Pasig: Anvil, 2010), 16.

ENDNOTES
(NINOY AQUINO)

[1] Alfonso P. Policarpio Jr., Ninoy: The
Willing Martyr (Manila: PDM Press
Inc, 1986), 37.

[2 ] Ibid., 44.

[3] Ibid., 57.

[4] Benigno S. Aquino Jr., Testament from

a Prison Cell (Makati City: Benigno S.
Aquino Jr. Foundation, 2000), 21.

[5] Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Philippine Electoral
Almanac (Manila: PCDSPO, 2015),
250.

[6] Aquino, Testament from a Prison Cell,

38.

[7] Patricio N. Abinales and Donna J.

Amoroso, State and Society in the
Philippines (Lanham, MD: Rowman
and Littlefield Publishers, 2005), 205.

[8] Aquino, Testament from a Prison Cell,

178-179.

201

SARAH JESSICA WONG, FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION,
AND COLINE ESTHER CARDENO

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines website to commemorate the
30th anniversary of the EDSA People Power
Revolution, February 25, 2016]

L INTRODUCTION

President Ferdinand E. Marcos assumed
power on December 30, 1965 and became
the second president re-elected to office
in 1969. There were efforts to maneuver
the 1971 Constitutional Convention to
permit his continuing in office! 11 With the
growing student radicalization and violent
demonstrations, Marcos played up middle-
class fears and used these to justify the
imposition of Martial Law on September 23,
1972 by virtue of Proclamation No. 1081.

Martial Law was not just an invocation of
the President’s emergency powers under
the 1935 Constitution — Marcos went
further to assume all governing powers,
excluded civilian courts, and systematically
replaced the 1935 Constitution with the

1973 Constitution for his own ends. The
replacement of the Constitution was done
under dubious circumstances. First, he ordered
a viva voce plebiscite on January 10 to 15,
1973 in which the voting age was reduced to
15 to ratify the new Constitution! 21 Military
men were placed prominently to intimidate
voters. Reports indicated that mayors and
governors were given quotas for “yes” votes
on the constitution and negative votes were
often not recorded! 31 Results report that 90%
of the citizens have voted for the constitution
even though some communities did not
participate in the “Citizens Assemblies.” 141
Over the next few years, Marcos would hold
four more plebiscites — in 1973, 1975, 1976,
and 1978 — through Citizen Assemblies to
legitimize his continuation of martial rule! 51

Second, he intimidated the Supreme Court
to approve it. Using the “stick and carrot
method” on the justices of the Supreme
Court, President Marcos was able to force
the Supreme Court to uphold Martial Law
and the new Constitution. Previously, around
8,000 individuals, including senators, civil

202

libertarians, journalists, students, and labor
leaders, were arrested and detained without
due process upon the declaration of Martial
Law. 161 With many of them filing petitions
to the Supreme Court for habeas corpus,
they challenged the constitutionality of
presidential proclamation. However, the
Supreme Court issued its final decision in
Javellana v. Executive Secretary, which
essentially validated the new Constitution.
This would be the final legitimizing decision
on the constitutionality of Martial Law:
in G.R. No. L-35546 September 17, 1974,
the Supreme Court dismissed petitions
for habeas corpus by ruling that Martial
Law was a political question beyond
the jurisdiction of the court; and that,
furthermore, the court had already deemed
the 1973 Constitution in full force and
effect, replacing the 1935 Constitution.

After the landmark decision, Chief Justice
Roberto V. Concepcion went into early
retirement, 50 days before his originally
scheduled retirement date, in silent protest
over the majority in the Javellana v. Executive
Secretary case. He argued against the validity
of the new Constitution and its questionable
aspects, together with Justices Claudio
Teehankee, Calixto Zaldivar, and Enrique
Fernando.

Martial Law imposed government control
over all forms of media. On September 22,
1972, Marcos issued Letter of Instruction
No. 1, ordering the Press Secretary and
Defense Secretary to assume control over
all media outlets. All periodicals were
padlocked, 171 and media personalities who
had criticized Marcos, his family, or his
administration were taken to Camp Crame

without any charges being filed. Among
them were publishers Joaquin “Chino” P.
Roces (Manila Times) and Eugenio Lopez
Jr. (Manila Chronicle), and columnists Max
Soliven and Luis D. Beltran. 181

Marcos issued at least eleven Presidential
Decrees that suppressed press freedom.
Journalists who did not comply with the
new restrictions faced physical threats,
libel suits, or forced resignation. 191 With
such stringent censorship regulations,
most of the periodicals that were allowed
to operate were crony newspapers, such
as Benjamin Romualdez’s Times Journal,
Hans Menzi’s Bulletin Today, and Roberto
Benedicto’s Philippine Daily Express. These
newspapers offered “bootlicking reportage”
on the country’s economy while completely
eschewing political issues. 1101

Hence, President Marcos’ absolute rule had
a “cloak of legality” 1111 and incontestability,
making it nearly impregnable. However,
specific factors converged and eventually led
to the fall of the dictatorship and the eventual
restoration of democracy in the Philippines.

II. FACTORS THAT LED
TO THE FALL OF THE
DICTATORSHIP

A. OPPOSITION TO MARTIAL LAW IN THE
1970S

Popular anti-Marcos sentiment existed for
the duration of Martial Law. According
to David Wurfel, the Martial Law regime
faced three main kinds of opposition in the
1970s: reformist opposition, revolutionary
opposition, and religious opposition. [12]

203

REFORMIST OPPOSITION

The reformist opposition, also known as
the legal opposition, was composed of
members of the upper-middle class. Using
nonviolent tactics, they advocated political
(not necessarily socioeconomic) reforms.
However, the reformist opposition was not
a united movement, but an amalgamation of
different middle and upper class groups who
had different motives. It was for this reason
that Marcos tolerated them, so long as they
were incapable of viably replacing him or
attaining the support of the masses. 1131 David
Wurfel writes:

Disunity within the reformist opposition
also reflected the diversity of interests and
the lack of ideology within the middle class.
The reformers shared certain values, such
as support for the rule of law, constitutional
legitimacy, free elections, and the protection
of personal freedoms, and they agreed on the
need to replace Marcos. But they agreed on
little else. On nationalism, land reform, and the
autonomy of labor organizations there was
everything from explicit demands to complete
silence. Once discussion went beyond the basic
characteristics of the political process, the
question of what to reform was a divisive one. t,4]

1978 was a watershed year for the reformist
opposition because it was the first election
year in the country since 1969. The reformist
opposition was divided on the issue of
boycotting the Interim Batasang Pambansa
(IBP) elections set for April 7.

Senator Gerardo “Gerry” Roxas refused to
reactivate the Liberal Party for the elections
because Marcos failed to address their

Kung 'di tayo kikibo, si no ang kikiboP
Kung 'di tayo kikilos , si no ang ki kilos?

LABAN para sa Kalayaan ng Bayan!

Fort Bonifacio

.. . February 18, 1978

My countrymen,

I write because I cannot go to you. I have been-refused my petition to be released temporarily

Why, a good many of you are asking, have I entered the April 7 IBP election?

Why, you ask, when my party leaders have refused to participate?

Rightly, the leaders of the Liberal Party, my party, made lifting of bloc voting the party's No. 1 condition for participation.
They would chance all the odds - the feet of martial law, etc. - but not in a bloc voting situation.

They seethe black spectres of 1947, 1949. And rightly.

So, when Mr. Marcos rejected their irreducible condition for proof of Mr. Marcos’ sincerity to hold a free election, they
declared the party as unalterably opposed to a voting system attended by massive electoral frauds in the past, which compelled
our Congress to repeal bloc voting in 1951 , and proclaimed the party’s non-participation as the party's political act in the
April 7 election.

As a partyman, I am in full agreement with this party decision. I have so informed the leaders of my party.

At the same time, I have pointed out to them that my circumstance is unique. For more than five years I have been held
in military detention - in the Maximum Security Unit prison of Fort Bonifacio. I have been held here in solitary confinement
since my arrest on the night martial law was imposed, with my contact with the outside world limited to my family and my lawyers

I have been shut away from you for over five years now — deprived of knowing what you really feel, what you truly think,
what you actually want. It is my hope that in this vehicle opened to me - in the campaign that begins today, in the vote you give
on April 7 — you will tell me and guide me in my future actions.

It is with this thought that I have asked my party’s leadership to permit me to run in the IBP - not as a partyman but with a
group of independent and like-minded citizens who are opposed to the martial law regime. My special plea has been granted.

It is with this same thought that I have written Mr. Marcos to reconsider the National Security Council decision denying my
request to be released temporarily — under guard by my custodial officers, under any security regulation that may be imposed — so
I can speak with you, the people, and get from you, not from filtered channels, what you truly want me to do.

I entertain no great illusions. I fully agree with the LP leadership's analysis that the electoral deck is stacked against the
opposition. BUT FIGHT WE WILL!

For, as the youth ask in the courageous campaign they have mounted: Kung ’di tayo kikibo, sino ang kikibo?

Kung 'di tayo kikilos, sino ang kikilos? Ito'y Laban ng Bayan para sa Ating Kalayaan. LABAN tayo!

I do not say we will obtain our freedom overnight. Indeed, there are only 21 of us — against all the Marcos
chosens from all the other regions. But we represent, I submit, a meaningful start in our — the Filipinos’ - common

We are 21 men and women of varying backgrounds and representations
— Liberals, Nacionalistas, Nationalist-Citizens, the partyless; youth and the
workingmen, men of commerce and slum dwellers, lawyers and teachers, even a
physician among us - but forged into LABAN, the People’s Coalition, by a
common persuasion: to speak the people's truth, to demand the people's

We stand for a government of, for, and by. the people - for a Good
Society, not just a New Society. There must be peace and order, we agree -
but order with justice, peace with freedom. Surely, what we stand for is an
alternative to be desired.

re been challenged to help in the normalization process. We will

he projects.

today jn Metro Mani

I, we can show him how to do it today in Metro h
- if only he will listen to us. /

; you. And as always, I am in your hire. / f( tLt

ninoyaquiIn*

Sigaw ng Bayan: LABAN! Sa Halalan, Iboto: LABAN!

PHOTO: Ninoy Aquino’s manifesto for the Lakas ng
Bayan (LABAN) campaign for the elections. Photo from
Ninoy: The Willing Martyr by Alfonso P. Policarpio Jr.

concerns regarding electoral reform; to
participate in such an unfair election would
have given it credibility, and the Martial Law
regime undue legitimacy. 1151 Jose W. Diokno,
a former Nacionalista and long-time critic of
Marcos and Martial Law, was also adamantly
opposed to the IBP elections. 1161

The most prominent opposition movement
that participated in the IBP elections was the
newly formed Lakas ng Bayan (LABAN) of
former senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr.,
who was imprisoned at that time. 1171 Ninoy
was initially apprehensive about running in
the election, but he decided to push through
with his candidacy to give the populace a
chance to air out their frustration against
the government. He campaigned from his
jail cell, even appearing for a 90-minute
television interview. 1181 Ninoy’s candidacy

204

inspired an outpouring of popular support
that culminated in a noise barrage on the
evening before the elections. At 8:00 p.m.,
residents in Metro Manila took to the
streets, making whatever noise they could
“to let Ninoy Aquino in his prison cell know
that the people had heard his message.” 1191
They banged on pots and pans, honked
their car horns, and shouted their throats
sore in support of Ninoy and LABAN. 1201
However, the elections were a total shutout
for LABAN, with Marcos’ Kilusang Bagong
Lipunan (KBL) winning 91 percent of the
seats in the IBP. 1211

In 1981, Marcos officially lifted Martial
Law, but since all decrees issued during that
time were still in force, the lifting was merely
a symbolic gesture. In the June presidential
elections of that year, he ran under the KBL,
his main opponent being Nacionalist Alejo
Santos. Unlike in the 1978 IBP elections, the
reformist opposition was united in its stance
to boycott the polls, labeling it a sham after
Marcos refused the conditions they had
previously proposed, such as a minimum
campaign period, a purging of voters’ lists,
equal time and space for the opposition,
and a reorganization of the Commission on
Elections (COMELEC). 1221

REVOLUTIONARY OPPOSITION

The government’s use of communist and
secessionist threats as justification for Martial
Law only contributed to the growth of the
political opposition and the amassing of
recruits to the New People’s Army (NPA) 1231
and the Moro National Liberation Front
(MNLF) in the provinces in the 1970s. 1241
When Martial Law was declared, the Moro

National Liberation Front (MNLF) was
immediately mobilized. Formed by students
and politicians from Mindanao, its goal was
to create the Bangsa Moro Republik (Moro
National Republic), composed of Mindanao,
Sulu, and Palawan. The Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) attempted to seize their
“illegal” firearms supplied by Libya, sparking
a war that lasted from 1973 to 1977. 1251

Over the course of the war, 13,000 people
were killed while over a million were
displaced. At the height of the conflict, the
government spent an estimated $1 million a
day to contain the rebellion. However, internal
problems within the MNLF prevented them
from exploiting Marcos’ weakness. Patricio
Abinales and Donna Amoroso write:

Its military leaders lacked combat experience
and suffered major battlefield losses, while
its political leaders split along ethnic lines
(Tausug versus Maguindanao) over tactical
issues. As the MNLF lost on the military
front, its politician allies also began to
defect, making separate peace pacts with
Marcos and presenting themselves as a
“moderate alternative” to the revolutionary
Moro nationalists. Government overtures and
the cooperation of conservative Arab states
eventually led to negotiations and a de facto
cease-fire in 1977. The MNLF was no match
for Marcos diplomatically and the decline
of Arab support made the continuation
of conventional warfare impossible. ... By
the time Marcos fell, the MNLF had lost its
dynamism as welll 263

In contrast, the Communist Party of the
Philippines (CPP) strengthened as Marcos’
dictatorship weakened; as opposed to the

205

Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas (PKP), which
surrendered in 1974. Following the principle
of “centralized command, decentralized
operations,” the CPP established autonomous,
regional, self-sustaining chapters all over
the Philippines. Not only did this give CPP
cadres more freedom to experiment with
tactics appropriate to their localities, it
also helped them survive the loss of many
original leaders, either to prison or death. 1271
In November, 1977, the Armed Forces scored
an important victory over the communist
rebels with the capture of Jose Maria Sison
and other important party leaders leading to
the disarray of the Communist Party. But the
triumph was short-lived and was too late as
the influence of the CPP grew stronger within
the provinces. 1281

Party growth was fastest in areas where
human rights violations were high due to
military presence. By the late 1970s, the
CPP could claim a guerrilla force of 15,000,
around the same number of cadres, and a
“mass base” of around one million. While
AFP forces also experienced rapid growth
during this period and were better equipped,
there was a difference between the two. Gregg
Jones writes that “[djespite a high rate of
illiteracy, communist soldiers could explain
why they were fighting and what they were
fighting for. In contrast, most government
soldiers were poor peasants or slum dwellers
who enlisted in the government army not
out of political conviction but because of
economic deprivation.” 1291

Through the Kilusang Mayo Uno (May First
Movement) and the League of Filipino Students,
the CPP was able to gather labor unions and
solidify its control of important schools. The

CPP also made “anti-imperialist” alliances with
nationalist senators like Lorenzo Tanada and
Jose W. Diokno, who could lend credibility and
publicity to claims of the Marcos government’s
human rights violations. 1301

RELIGIOUS OPPOSITION

Martial Law also faced opposition from
the religious sector. Mainline Protestant
churches were vocal in its opposition of the
dictatorship since 1972; by 1978, it was
holding mass protest actions; and by 1981,
boycott campaigns of the April plebiscite and
the June presidential elections. 1311 Meanwhile
the Catholic Church, which sympathized
with Marcos’ anti-communism, maintained
a position of “critical collaboration” while
paying attention to the opposition among
its members. 1321 This allowed it a degree of
autonomy when it came to carrying out their
social projects, which focused on alleviating
poverty and defending the poor against
communism. However, the provincial clergy
started becoming radicalized after seeing the
effects of the Marcos dictatorship on the
poor. They formed Christians for National
Liberation, which clandestinely used Church
“social action” programs to get foreign
funding through private donor agencies
that shared the same views. 1331 Abinales and
Amoroso write:

Church leaders were appalled by this radical
infiltration, but could do little about it. To
attack its own rank and file for following
the official Church position on human rights
and social justice would open the hierarchy
to charges of supporting the dictatorship.
A serious breach opened up within the
Philippine Church. [34]

206

When Jaime Cardinal Sin replaced the
conservative Rufino Cardinal Santos as
Archbishop of Manila, one of his first acts
was to issue a letter condemning the summary
arrest of Frs. Jose Blanco and Benigno Mayo,
Jesuits. They were arrested in a raid on the
Sacred Heart Novitiate in Novaliches, in
1974. Sin presided over a prayer vigil for the
detained priests, “which more than 5,000
persons attended, the largest anti-martial law
protest at the time.” In 1975, Sin declared his
opposition to a Marcos decree “banning all
labor strikes.” Pres. Gerald Ford was visiting
Manila, so Marcos beat a hasty retreat
and confined the prohibition to strategic
industries. The harassment continued.
Church-owned media, which had escaped
closure in 1972, was shut down in 1976 to
1977, among them the weekly newspaper
and radio station of Bishop Francisco
Claver’s diocese in Bukidnon, Davao’s radio
station, and Church magazines in Manila.
The government threatened to tax Church
properties and subject them to urban land
reform. Sin’s policy of “critical collaboration”
during this time began to give away to
active resistance, as the religious indignation
spread over the continuing arrests and more
of the clergy became radicalized. Sin may
have thought to steal the thunder from the
radical priests by hurling the bolts himself.
Protestant groups began to rally against
Marcos in 1978. By 1979, Sin was firmly
on the path to his preeminent role in the
overthrow of Marcos. [35]

On January 17, 1981, in an effort to calm the
growing opposition of the Catholic Church,
President Marcos lifted martial law (if by
name only) via Proclamation No. 2045 in
preparation for the first state visit of Saint

Pope John Paul II, the leader of the Roman
Catholic Church, on February 17, 1981.

In the events leading to the important state
visit, the Coconut Palace was commissioned
by First Lady Imelda Marcos to be built at the
cost of P37 million as the guesthouse of the
Pope. However, the Pontiff refused, saying it
was too ostentatious, given the state of the
poor in the country! 361 Moreover, during his
visit in Malacanan Palace, the Pope delivered
a speech explicitly condemning the human
rights violations committed under the
regime. He said:

Even in exceptional situations that may at
times arise, one can never justify any violation
of the fundamental dignity of the human
person or of the basic rights that safeguard
this dignity ! 371

Since then, the Catholic Church had
withdrawn its support of the Marcos
administration.

B. MARCOS’ HEALTH AND THE ISSUE OF
SUCCESSION

As early as 1 979, the health of President Marcos
had been deteriorating! 381 This was kept a
secret at first, but it was common knowledge
then that Marcos was already sick, especially
at the time of the assassination of Ninoy
Aquino! 391 Marcos’ health status worsened by
mid-November of 1984. Bias Ople, Marcos’
Minister of Labor, divulged the situation for
the first time on record on December 3, 1984,
saying that Marcos was “in control but cannot
take major initiatives at this time.” He stated
that, “The health of our leader is undergoing
certain vicissitudes, problems which started a

207

year ago.” [401 On October 28, 1985, according
to congressional and U.S. intelligence sources
quoted by the Washington Post, Marcos
was diagnosed with an “incurable, recurring
sickness” called systemic lupus erythematosus.
1411 This disease was further complicated by
Marcos’ diabetes. 1421

Marcos’ failing health, coupled with the
looming threat from the anti -capitalist left, led
to widespread concern for a stable succession
among the country’s economic elite — the
main beneficiaries of Martial Law’s crony
capitalism. 1431 The plebiscite held on April 7,
1981 ratified the constitutional amendment
creating the Executive Committee, composed
of at most 14 members, at least half of which
were Assemblymen. 1441 The Committee was
meant to be “a stepping stone for future
leadership in the country [...] a high-level
training ground for future Prime Ministers
and Presidents.” 1451 It was deemed necessary
at that time because no one member of
the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL) was
deemed capable of taking over for President
Marcos in the event of his death, resignation,
or incapacitation; it was implied that the
Committee member who performed the best
would be Marcos’ successor. 1461 Contenders for
the presidency started positioning themselves
to gain the upper hand. For instance, there
were attempts to discredit Prime Minister
Cesar Virata and the programs associated
with economic technocrats, while Imelda
Marcos’ strove to repair her tarnished image
(especially in the provinces) while pushing
her son Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.
further into the public eyed 471

However, Marcos’ deteriorating health
necessitated clearer guidelines for determining

a successor. Another plebiscite on January 27,
1984 ratified the constitutional amendment
abolishing the Executive Committee and
restoring the Office of the Vice President, 1481 to
be filled in the upcoming 1987 elections 1491 —
which never came because Marcos announced
a snap election in 1985. The same plebiscite
also designated the speaker of the Batasang
Pambansa as acting president should the
presidency be vacated before the 1987
presidential elections. 1301

PHOTO: Ousted President Marcos and Imelda
Marcos in exile at the backyard of their villa
overlooking Honolulu, Hawaii on March 1988.
Diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus, he
had several surgeries for kidney dialysis a year after
this photo was taken. Marcos died on September
28 of the same year, due to heart, kidney and lung
failure. Photo by Gamblin Yann.

C. THE COLLAPSE OF THE PHILIPPINE
ECONOMY

Economist James Boyce commented, “If the
central aim of economic development is the
reduction of poverty, then the Philippine
development strategy in the Marcos era was
an abysmal failure.” 1511 In the last years of the
Marcos regime, the Philippine economy was
almost grinding to a halt. This was so, despite
the fact that the Marcos administration
implemented its three-pronged development

208

strategy: (1) The green revolution 1521 in
agriculture, 1531 (2) growth and diversity in
agricultural and forestry exports, and (3)
massive external borrowing. The profit
from these three strategies were amassed
disproportionately to the wealthiest in the
population, thereby causing a large disparity
between the rich and the poor.

In the case of agriculture, the higher rice
yields saved land for export crops and saved
foreign exchange for non-rice imports but
these gains never trickled down to the poor. In
addition, there were government intervention,
cronyism and monopolization of agricultural
markets such as that of sugar and coconut. 1541
In these cases, key government agencies were
managed by Marcos associates and cronies,
whose operations were not audited. 1551

Sugar was the country’s second most
important export in the Marcos regime.
Specifically, in the mid- 1970’s, sugarcane
plantations doubled to more than 500,000
hectares. This increase, however, did not
translate to an increase in harvest and profit
which led ultimately to a stagnation and
eventual decline in the mid- 1 970 ’s. 1561 As early
as 1974, a government sugar monopsony was
established to participate in world trade and
reap the benefits of increasing world prices
in sugar. When the sugar market declined in
1975 - 1976, the trading responsibilities were
transferred to PHILSUCOM 1571 (Philippine
Sugar Commission), headed by Roberto
Benedicto, and to NASUTRA 1581 (National
Sugar Trading Corporation), headed by an
associate of Marcos.

Under Benedicto’s chairmanship, the
PHILSUCOM was empowered to buy, sell,

and set prices for sugar; and to buy and
take over milling companies. He also set up
the Republic Planter’s Bank, which became
the sugar industry’s main source of finance
during that time. 1591 For this, Benedicto
was accused of “using his position to great
advantage over the past several years to
forge an economic fiefdom, to amass great
wealth and to develop considerable political
influence in sugar growing areas ” . The United
States Embassy reported that Benedicto had
several profit mechanisms as follows:

• bribery; acceptance of payoffs or bribes
from traders lobbying for guaranteed
profit margins of sugar prices in the
domestic market.

• smuggling of sugar supplies; at least
600,000 metric tons of raw sugar was
reportedly missing from the NASUTRA
warehouses

• withholding of taxes, PNP loan payments,
as well as export trading costs;

These operations “amount to a significant
and growing drain on the economy of the
country”. 1601 Moreover, the sugar-marketing
monopoly effectively protected the interests
of the sugar hacienderos close to Marcos,
while small landowners bore the brunt of the
crisis, causing widespread starvation among
sugar plantation workers (specifically in
Negros), reaching the international media. 1611
Furthermore other large-scale sugar owners
grew resentful of President Marcos because
of the sugar-marketing monopoly that did his
bidding and the subsequent land-grabbing. 1621
At the end of Marcos regime, the Philippine
sugar industry nearly collapsed. Majority
of the planters were in debt and sugarcane
plantation dwindled. 1631

209

In the case of coconuts, beginning in 1973,
the Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA)
monopolized export and increased coconut
tax in order to stabilize market prices. 1641
Coconut marketing during the Marcos era
was monopolized by a “single entity with
effective control over virtually all copra
purchases and over the production and sale
of coconut oil on the domestic and export
markets”. 1651 This monopoly was technically
made possible by Marcos’ presidential
decrees, providing for levies on all coconut
production and an establishment of a bank.
While these changes were imposed to benefit
the the coconut growers, in practice, the main
beneficiaries were Eduardo Cojuangco, the so
called ‘coconut king’, and Juan Ponce Enrile,
two of President Marcos’ closest associates. 1661

In foreign loans, its primary pretext was for
Philippine domestic investment and building
public infrastructure. However, these loans
were diverted to a few private companies,
all of which were under Marcos cronies,
eroding the quality and quantity of domestic
investments; the rest were diverted to banks
abroad. One striking evidence of this was the
Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, which was built
at the cost of $1.2 billion but never generated
a kilowatt of electricity under the Marcos
regime. “The losers were the Philippine
people,” writes Raymond Bonner, “the poor,
on whose behalf the billion dollars could have
been better spent, as well as the middle class
and the wealthy, who would have to shoulder
this economically backbreaking colossus.” 1671

In 1973, Marcos decided that the Philippines
had to have a nuclear power plant — then
considered the hallmark of a modern
nation — because it fit in with Marcos’

ostentatious vision of himself and the
country. However, such an endeavor at that
time was problematic: at best, the power
plant would have generated power for only
15 percent of Luzon’s population. Security
was another issue: there were four active
volcanoes located within 100 miles from the
proposed site. Furthermore, the Philippines
was one of the poorest nations setting out
on the nuclear path; only Japan, Taiwan, and
South Korea were building nuclear power
plants in East Asia, and they were far better
off economically and technologically. 1681

The power plant was the largest and most
expensive construction project in the
country’s history. Given the monumental
expenses, funding the project out of the
government’s treasury was impossible, so the
government turned to Export-Import Bank
in Washington, D.C. for assistance. In 1975,
a loan worth $277 million in direct loans
and $367 million in loan guarantees was
approved by Ex-Im Bank chairman William
J. Casey, one of Marcos’ biggest supporters.
It was the largest loan package the bank had
approved anywhere. 1691

Westinghouse Electric initially submitted a
vague, undetailed $500 million bid for two
plants. General Electric, on the other hand,
submitted four full volumes detailing cost
and specifications, conducted nuclear power
seminars in Manila, and invited Philippine
officials to visit its plant in California. Marcos,
brooking no opposition, gave the contract to
Westinghouse. After Westinghouse secured
the contract, it submitted a serious proposal
amounting to $1.2 billion for just one
reactor — almost 400 percent higher than
the original bid of $500 million. Marcos

210

was guaranteed a cut of nearly $80 million,
which Westinghouse transmitted through
Marcos crony Herminio Disini using a “maze
of channels, cutouts, and stratagems.” 1701
Raymond Bonner elaborates:

Disini owned a construction company, which
he had purchased with a government-backed
loan and which had been awarded, without
bits, a cost plus fixed fee contract for all civil
construction at the nuclear power plant site.
The price of the equipment for the project “was
inflated, as a way to cover the cost of the fees
to Disini,” a lawyer who worked on the project
explained to Fox Butterfield of The New York
Times. Westinghouse set up a subsidiary in
Switzerland, which tunneled the money into
Disini’s European bank accounts. The Swiss
subsidiary, after entering into the deal with the
Philippine government, assigned the contract
to the Westinghouse International Projects
Company, which had been established
solely to handle the Philippine project.
Westinghouse International, in turn, entered
into a subcontract with the Westinghouse
Electric Corporation, the parent company in
Pittsburgh. Westinghouse officials repeatedly
denied any wrongdoing with the project. [71]

By 1986 — more than a decade and
$1.2 billion later — the power plant was
still not operational. 1721

The old economic elite, whom President
Marcos called the “oligarchy,” relatively
tolerated the systematic favoritism of
the administration on crony companies.
This changed In 1981, when Filipino-
Chinese business tycoon Dewey Dee of the
Binondo Central Bank left the country for
Canada, leaving nearly PHP600 million

PHOTO: Bataan Nuclear Power Plant.

Photo courtesy of Vinnell Belvoir Corporation.

in debt, seriously compromising the crony
corporations. Government banks announced
a rescue fund of approximately PHP5 billion
in credit and equity capital, which the old
elite found unfair, launching a barrage of
public criticism. 1731

The impoverishment of the economy led to
the loss of support of the middle class and
the small-time landowners and farmers in
the regions on the Marcos administration.
Poverty, aside from human rights violations
by the military, also became a means for
rebel groups to recruit citizens to their cause.
In 1978, the strength of the Moro National
Liberation Front (MNLF) grew from 6,900
to over 20,000 regulars. 1741 In 1980, the
New People’s Army formed 26 guerrilla
fronts with over 16,000 regulars, and the
Communist Party of the Philippines have
attracted 40,000 mass activists. 1751

D. THE ASSASSINATION OF NINOY
AQUINO

After three years of exile in the United States,
Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr., the foremost
leader of the Marcos opposition, decided

211

to come back to the Philippines, intending
to restore democracy in the country and
convince President Marcos for an orderly
succession. Previously, Aquino had been
incarcerated by the military for seven years
before being released for bypass surgery in the
United States. Ninoy Aquino’s conversation
with journalist Teodoro Locsin Jr. before he
went back to the Philippines was revealing. 1761
He was quoted as saying:

"I’ll go to Marcos, if he'll see me. I’ll appeal to
his sense of history, of his place in it. He would
not be publishing all those books of his if he
did not care for the judgment of history, if he
did not want to look good in it. And that would
be possible, I’ll tell him, only if there was an
orderly restoration of democracy and freedom
for our people. Otherwise, there would be
only revolution and terrible suffering. I give
the moderate opposition five years to restore
democracy, after that there will be only the
Communists as an alternative to Marcos or his
successor. I’ll offer my services to him, but my
price is freedom for our people.” [77]

He departed from Boston on August 13,
1983. Despite news of a death threat, Ninoy
maintained in an interview on August 21,1983
that “if it’s [my] fate to die by an assassin’s
bullet, then so be it. [...] [I have] to suffer with
our people and [I have] to lead them.”

Aquino landed in the Manila International
Airport via China Airlines Flight 811 at 1:05
p.m. on August 21, and was escorted by
armed men out of the plane. Minutes later,
gunshots were heard. The former senator
was shot dead by an assassin’s bullet to
the head. When the news of Ninoy’s death
spread, approximately seven million came

PHOTO: Ninoy Aquino’s assassination.. Photo
taken from Ninoy: Ideals & Ideologies 1932-1983.

to his funeral procession on August 31, the
biggest and longest in Philippine history. This
singular event further eroded the people’s
support of the Marcos regime.

THE FAILURE OF THE SNAP ELECTION OF
1986

In the first week of November 1985, when
President Marcos was interviewed by the
David Brinkley Show, he stated his intention
to call for a snap election, even going so far
as to invite the members of the U.S. Congress
to observe, calling the accusation of fraud as
unfounded. 1781 This, it seems, was an attempt
to consolidate support and show the U.S.
the legitimacy of the Marcos administration.
The announcement for a snap election
within three months was ahead of schedule;
the next regular elections were supposed to
be held in 1987. The overconfident president
disregarded the objections of his family, his
Cabinet and his party. 1791 Even First Lady
Imelda Marcos, who was abroad at the
time, was also reportedly taken aback by
the announcement. 1801 However, as recent
scholarship suggests, this confidence only
showed his isolation from the people whose
support on his administration had already

212

waned. Marcos’ Labor Minister, Bias Ople
writes:

He (Marcos) couldn’t say that he was
beleaguered and encircled, that he was
losing the support of Washington and the
international community and that he needed
a breakthrough to reestablish his ability to
govern. He was never that frank with us but
we knew why. [s,]

Marcos had to consolidate his forces if the
election would go to his favor. As it was
before the declaration of Martial Law,
Marcos needed the support of the military.
While acting Chief of Staff General Fidel V.
Ramos was next in line as the Chief of Staff,
the president knew that he needed Fabian
Ver back. Ver was on leave, as he was being
prosecuted in the Aquino-Galman murder
case. By December 2, 1985, Ver and 26 other
suspects were acquitted in a legal decision
that caused public outraged 821

Meanwhile, prior to the snap election
announcement, a “Convenor Group” was
formed, composed of Lorenzo Tanada,
Jaime V. Ongpin, and Cory Aquino, to
select a presidential candidate for the
opposition. Cory was regarded as the
rightful candidate, the “people’s choice,”
who was also promoted by Jaime Cardinal
Sin. [83] For fear of being left out, Salvador
Laurel of the United Nationalist Democratic
Organization (UNIDO) and Eva Kalaw of
the Liberal Party (LP) formed the National
Unification Committee’s (NUC). [841 Laurel
was nominated by the NUC’s Nominating
Convention held at the Araneta Coliseum as
the presidential candidate of the opposition
party for the coming Snap elections. 1851

PHOTO: Cory Aquino with her son, Benigno S.
Aquino III. on the campaign trail, 1986. Photo from
Teddy Locsin Jr.

Meanwhile, Cory Aquino announced her
intention to run if a snap election was to be
held and if she had the support of a million
citizens! 861 She was successful in gaining this
support. The opposition, therefore had two
frontrunners: Aquino, and former Senator
Salvador “Doy” Laurel. Flowever, in the same
year, on December 7, Laurel decided to give
way to Aquino. Though initially reluctant,
Laurel was eventually convinced that their
tandem was the only way the opposition stood
a chance against the overwhelming influence
of Marcos and the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan
(KBL), and decided to run as Aquino’s vice
president. In Teodoro L. Locsin Jr.’s article in
the Philippine Free Press, Cory served as the
“symbol of unity.” Fie further wrote:

213

"Cory would be the presidential candidate,
and Doy who had spent substance and energy
to create ex nihilo a political organization
to challenge the Marcos machine must
subordinate himself as her running mate.”

Aquino and Laurel ran together under the
United Nationalist Democratic Organization
(UNIDO).' 87 ]

During the 1986 snap elections, President
Ferdinand E. Marcos used gender as an issue
in his campaign broadcast against rival for
the presidency, Corazon C. Aquino. This
broadcast warns that a woman would not be
able to handle the challenges of the post.

Businessman Jose Concepcion headed a group
of concerned citizens to revive the National
Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL),
established in 1957 after the fraud of the 1949
presidential election, as the citizens’ watchdog
on the counting of votes. It had a successful
run in the legislative elections of 1984,
releasing an unofficial untampered count.
KBL attempted to discredit NAMFREL, but
due to international pressure, COMELEC
gave the watchdog organization an official
observer status. [88]

Massive poll fraud and rampant cheating
marred the vote on the election day of
February 7, 1986. Thousands of registered
voters — who had voted successfully in
previous elections — found their names
suspiciously missing from the lists on
election day.' 891 Approximately 850 foreign
correspondents flew in to observe,' 901 including
the delegations headed by U.S. senators
and congressmen, who saw vote rigging
happen.' 91 ! On February 9, 35 COMELEC

employees and computer operators at the
COMELEC Tabulation Center walked out in
protest due to the wide discrepancy between
the computer tabulation and the tally board,
showing blatant manipulation of electoral
results.' 92 ' In the countryside, precincts were
hounded by the military and ballot-rigging
was rampant. NAMFREL, in turn, showed
Aquino in the lead with almost 70% of the
votes canvassed.

By February 15, 1986, in an unprecedented
announcement that was met with public
outrage, the Batasang Pambansa proclaimed
Marcos and Arturo Tolentino as the winners
of the presidential and vice-presidential race

PHOTO: Afraid of ruling party goons who have
been known to snatch ballot boxes to throw them
away or to stuff them with favorable manufactured
votes, vigilantes form human barricades for boxes
being brought from precincts to municipal halls for
official tally. Photo by Ben Avestruz, People Power:
The Philippine Revolution of 1986.

PHOTO: On February 9, 1986, thirty-five tabulators
manning the COMELEC’s quick count computer
terminals walked out during the 1986 snap
elections. Photo from Bantayog Museum.

214

PHOTO: Twenty-six parliamentary members
walk out from the floor of the National Assembly
just before the assembly proclaimed President
Ferdinand Marcos winner of the February 7 election.
The official tally had Marcos the victor over Corazon
Aquino by 1.5 million votes. Photo by Jun Brioso.

respectively, by virtue of Resolution No. 38.
Opposition assemblymen walked out of the
Session Hall in protest.

This led to the opposition’s indignation
rally in Luneta the next day where Cory
Aquino spoke to around two million people
in Luneta, in what would be known as the
Tagumpay ng Bayan rally. At the event,
Aquino called for massive civil disobedience
and boycott of Marcos-crony owned
companies and products. The Aquino-Laurel
ticket also proclaimed victory.

The International Observer Delegation,
composed of 44 delegates from 19 different
countries who observed the electoral
process, also released their report citing
disturbing anomalies in the election results
and subsequent intimidation of voters. 1941

February 25 was chosen as the day of
President Marcos’ inauguration . [95] As
inaugural invitations were sent to the
diplomatic corps, none of embassies sent their
congratulatory remarks to Marcos, except

LIST OF 35 TABULATORS WHO WALKED

OUT C93]

1. Linda (Kapunan) Angeles-Hill

2. Rory Asuncion

3. Zoe Castro

4. Mario Lavin

5. Myrna “Shiony” Asuncion-Binamira

6. Bot Bautista

7. Charles Chan

8. Thess Baltazar-Roberto

9. Jane Rosales-Yap

10. Erlyn Barza

11. Nori Bolado

12. Euly Molina-Legro

13. Cooly Culiat-Medina

14. Rubi Macato-Slater

15. Erick Celestino

16. Nitro Palomares-Castro

17. Alicia Torres

18. Dennie Estolas-Vista

19. Marissa Contreras-Legaspi

20. Maite de Rivera

21. Ernie Alberto

22. Achie Concepcion-Jimenez

23. Bambi Flor-Sena

24. Bing Romero-Justo

25. Marisa Briones- Allarey

26. Maleen Cruz-Ngan

27. Naz Gutierrez III

28. Vangie Saludares

29. Marissa Almendral

30. Mina Fajardo Bergara

31. Luchie Lavin

32. Irma Sunico-Buno

33. Gi Antonio-Silva

34. Jules Valderrama

35. Celine Vinoya-Rivera

215

for Soviet ambassador Vadim Shabalin, who
was apparently in Malacanan for courtesy
call. When President Marcos informed him
of the supposed result of the election, the
ambassador offered his compliments, which
is now cited as a grave diplomatic error. 1961
The silence of foreign governments alarmed
the administration.

On February 22, 1986, Marcos sent his
Labor Minister Bias Ople and his Executive
Secretary Alejandro Melchor to the United
States, J.V. Cruz and Presidential Assistant
for General Government Jacobo Clave to
Europe, in a last ditch effort to legitimize his
win in the presidency. Roberto Benedicto and
Arturo Tolentino were to be sent to Japan,
and the ASEAN (Association of Southeast
Asian Nations) countries respectively. 1971

With the calls for boycott of crony companies
announced by Cory Aquino, there was a
sharp fall of San Miguel Corporation in the
stock market. Manila Bulletin also lost a
significant number of readers.

F. COUP PLOT BY THE RAM

The Reform the Armed Forces Movement
(RAM) emerged in 1982 as small, secret
group intent on strengthening military rule
through a coup d’etat. 1981 Initially, it was
composed of Defense Minister Juan Ponce
Enrile and a handful of regular officers from
the Philippine Military Academy (PMA),
who harbored resentment against General
Fabian Ver, the Chief of Staff of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

The divide between PMA-trained regulars
and officers from the Reserve Officers’
Training Corps (ROTC) was already
evident in the early years of Martial Law.
Marcos appointed ROTC officers to the top
positions in the army, navy, and air force,
passing over senior PMA graduates. 1 " 1 When
Ver succeeded Romeo Espina as Marcos’
Chief of Staff, Ver was quick to isolate his
rivals. “Ignoring merit or seniority,” writes
Alfred McCoy, “he played upon ethnicity,
blood, and school ties to pick favorites
for key commands.” 11001 As an alumnus of
the University of the Philippines reserve
program, he promoted former reservists and
retained them even after their mandatory
retirement, thus stifling the upward mobility
of PMA-trained regulars. 11011

By early 1985, the RAM was a fully organized
group with a leadership committee of 11
men and a membership base of around three
hundred. Although relatively small, the RAM
had the support of a majority of AFP officers,
especially the PMA regulars. 11021 By the
middle of the year, the RAM went public, yet
popular suspicion regarding the movement’s
integrity arose due to its inclusion of former

216

military torturers. 11031 Still, most media outlets
ignored their human rights record, choosing
instead to paint the RAM as reformers. 11041

Plans for a Christmas coup in 1985 were
started in August but when President Marcos
unexpectedly called for snap elections in
November, 11051 RAM leaders had to rethink
their strategy, and the coup was postponed
to the following year. When Marcos was
proclaimed the winner in the fraudulent
February 7 elections, the RAM leaders agreed
to launch their coup at 2:00 a.m. (“H-hour”)
on Sunday, February 23, 1986. 11061

The plan was as follows: At 1 :30 a.m., Colonel
Gregorio “Gringo” Honasan and twenty
commandos would cross the Pasig River on
rubber rafts and break into the Malacanan
Palace, arresting President Marcos and
Imelda. At 2:00 a.m. Lieutenant Colonel
Eduardo “Red” Kapunan would command
a hundred-man strike team to attack the
security compound on the southern bank
of the Pasig River. Using smoke grenades
as cover, they would detonate bombs and
kill General Fabian Ver. The explosions
would serve as a signal for two motorized
RAM columns to break through the gates
of the security compound. Major Saulito
Aromin’s 49th Infantry Battalion would
launch a simultaneous maneuver, posing
as pro-Marcos reinforcements to reinforce
Honasan’s commandos and secure the
Palace. At 2:30 a.m, the Presidential Security
Command would transmit false orders to
eight pro-Marcos battalions in the capital
to keep them from moving. At the same
time, Colonel Tito Legazpi would capture
Villamor Airbase and radio RAM units in
the provinces to fly to Manila. At 3:00 a.m.,

just an hour after the coup’s launch, Enrile
would issue Proclamation No. 1, establishing
a revolutionary government. 11071

Yet for all the RAM leaders’ confidence in
their plan, they did not have the command
experience to successfully carry out the
complicated operation after almost ten years
of sitting in air-conditioned offices. 11081 And to
make matters worse, Ver knew of the coup.
On the Thursday before the planned coup, he
summoned his senior officers and engineered
a trap. He ordered a navy demolition team
to plant bombs and mines along the palace
riverfront. As the rebels made their way
toward the palace on rafts, Ver would blind
them with powerful spotlights. Marcos’ son,
Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., would
be brought out with a loud hailer, giving
the rebels a final chance to surrender. If the
rebels did not stand down, they would be
blown sky high. 11091

The rebels only realized that their plan had
been compromised on the Friday night before
the coup, when Honasan and Kapunan
saw a large number of troops amassing at
Malacanang. They informed Enrile about the
situation, and the assault on the palace had
to be called off. 11101

Faced with only two options — dispersing or
regrouping — Enrile chose the latter as the
“more honorable” option. 11111 He announced
his defection from Marcos on Saturday night
in a press conference at Camp Aguinaldo,
alongside Lieutenant General Fidel V.
Ramos, Ver’s deemed successor. 11121 In the
first critical hours of the uprising, RAM
leaders called on former PMA classmates
and comrades, pleading for support or at

217

* m. . *l wh

PHOTO: The map used by General Fabian Ver to plan out the attack on Camp Crame and Camp Aguinaldo,
superimposed onto a current aerial photograph of the area. This map was drawn on a blackboard and remains
on display in the Presidential Museum and Library.

the very least neutrality, thus undermining
Marcos’ defenses. 11131

At 9:00 p.m., Jaime Cardinal Sin made his
famous announcement over Radio Veritas,
beseeching the people to bring food and
gather at Camps Aguinaldo and Crame to
support Enrile and Ramos. An hour later,
Enrile finally reached Cory Aquino via
telephoned 1141 Aquino was at an anti-Marcos
rally in Cebu City. She was informed of
the coup, 11151 but she was also suspicious
of Enrile ’s motives. Half a day later, she
announced her support for the rebellion and
asked the people to help. 11161

On that first night, people came to EDSA by
the thousands with whatever provisions they
could offer: pans of pancit, boxes of pizza,
tins of biscuits, bunches of bananas. 11171
Edwin Lacierda, presidential spokesperson
of President Benigno S. Aquino III, was there
to witness: “More than a rally,” he recalls,
“all of us came to EDSA to break bread and
fellowship with all who were willing to stand
in the line of fire and take the bullet, as it were,
for freedom and change of government.” 11181

Thus began the four-day EDSA People Power
Revolution. The revolution was a peaceful
one, with soldiers being coaxed with food,
prayers, flowers, and cheers by people from

218

all walks of life who sat, stood, and knelt in
prayer in front of the tanks. 11191 For instance,
on February 24, the government-controlled
Channel 4 was liberated by women who
were sent into the compound to negotiate
with the loyalist soldiers. 11201 Church-owned
radio station Radio Veritas did a marathon
coverage of the revolution; disc jockey June
Keithley, who averaged seventeen hours on
air daily over the four days, kept the public
informed in between airings of “Ang Bayan
Ko,” “Tie a Yellow Ribbon,” and a curiously
resurrected political jingle from the 1950s
called “Mambo Magsaysay.” 11211

In the evening of February 22, Marcos
personally telephoned General Prospero Olivas
five times, ordering him to disperse the crowd
at Camp Aguinaldo, because their presence
would complicate an assault. A mentee of
Ramos, Olivas feigned compliance and
countermanded Marcos’ orders. Marcos then
turned to General Alfredo Lim, the Metrocom
district commander, but Lim was also loyal to
Ramos and disregarded Marcos’ orders. 11221

In addition to the reluctance of Marcos’
officers, Marine Commandant Artemio Tadiar
also pointed out the military incompetence of
Ver’s plan, saying, “Every inch of the palace
was occupied, literally.” “There were [...] over
eight thousand men packed so tightly in the
narrow streets around the palace that they
had no room to maneuver, and reinforcements
were still arriving.” 11231

On February 24, at 5:00 a.m., Marcos was
heard over the radio, “We’ll wipe them out. It
is obvious they are committing rebellion.” 11241
On that Monday morning, government
troops headed by Marine battalions began
their advance to Camp Crame from different

directions as a dozen of helicopters encircled
the camp. At 6:20 a.m., the tensed crowd
around the Constabulary Headquarters
waited with uncertainty as the helicopters
approached. 11251 Wurfel narrates one of the
pivotal events of People Power as fear turned
into loud cheers from the crowd:

When eight helicopters circled over Camp
Crame on Monday morning, fears of
bombardment were still high, but they landed
and joined the rebels. This was probably the
military turning point; thereafter military
defections took place at an increasing pace.
Yet Ver threatened to bomb and strafe Camp
Crame, and Marcos held a press conference
where he insisted, “I don't intend to step down
as President. Never, never!”

At 8:30 a.m., government troops broke into
the rear of Camp Aguinaldo and trained their
howitzers and mortars on Camp Crame. By
9:00 a.m., General Josephus Ramas gave
the Fourth Marine brigade the “kill order”
while civilians were still inside, but the
brigade’s commander Colonel Braulio Baibas
hesitated. Instead, he told Ramas, “We’re still
positioning the cannons.” 11261 Ramas would
ask Baibas to attack four times, and each
time, Baibas stalled. Marcos lost control of
the Marines. 11271

At around the same time, a rebel frigate
anchored at the mouth of the Pasig River
had its guns aimed at Malacanan, just three
kilometers away. Earlier that morning, Naval
Defense Force chief Commodore Tagumpay
Jardiniano told his men that he had declared
himself for Enrile and Ramos. His men stood
up and applauded, and Marcos lost control
of the navy. 11281

219

At 9:15 a.m., Marcos, together with Ver
appeared on television for a Press Conference.
Ver requested Marcos permission to attack
Camp Crame. But Marcos postured on
television to restrain Ver, saying, “My order
is to disperse without shooting them.” 11291
However, when Marine commandant
General Artemio Tadiar met with Ver later,
Ver confirmed that Marcos approved the kill
order on Crame. ll30]

After Marcos lost complete control of the
military, his presidency came to an end the
following day, on February 25, 1986.

III. CONCLUSION

From February 22 to 25, 1986, hundreds of
thousands of people amassed at Epifanio de
los Santos Avenue (EDSA), Metro Manila’s
main thoroughfare, calling for the peaceful
ouster of the dictator. On February 25, 1986,
Corazon C. Aquino and Salvador H. Laurel
took their oaths in Club Filipino as President
and Vice President respectively. Meanwhile,
Marcos was inaugurated in the Ceremonial
Hall of the Malacanan Palace and delivered
his inaugural address in Maharlika Hall (now
Kalayaan Hall) on that same day. Rocked by
key military and political defections and the
overwhelming popular support for Aquino,
Marcos was forced to depart with his
family a few hours later for exile in Hawaii,
effectively ending Marcos’ two-decade long
dictatorial rule.

Following a rocket attack from the rebel
helicopters, General Ver radioed the wing
commander of the F-5 fighters in Manila,
ordering them to bomb Camp Crame.
Francisco Baula, the squadron leader and
RAM member, answered sarcastically:
“Yes, sir, roger. Proceeding now to strafe
Malacanang.” [131] At 1:00 p.m., Gen. Ver
gave secret orders to Maj. Gen. Vicente
Piccio to launch an air attack on Camp
Crame, to which Gen. Piccio replied, “But,
sir, we have no more gunships. They have
just been destroyed.” [132] Marcos lost control
of the air force.

By March 1986, 11331 intelligence sources
surfaced indicating that President Marcos
was planning to stage widespread bombing
and arson throughout Manila so that he
could impose another martial law-called
“Operation Everlasting.” The plan was to
neutralize all opposition by arresting all
opposition leaders, the entire executive
council of NAMFREL 11341 and the RAM
rebels in a planned concentration camp in
Caballo Island near Corregidor. [135] Hence,
the EDSA People Power Revolution averted
a resumption of an oppressive regime that
would have curtailed the country’s civil
liberties in years to come.

220

PHOTO: The Philippines had its "longest day"
on February 25, 1986, as it started the day with
virtually no president, had two presidents by
noon, and one president before midnight. TOP,
oath taking as President by Corazon C. Aquino
at Club Filipino before Associate Justice Claudio
Teehankee. BOTTOM, President Ferdinand E.
Marcos sworn in by Chief Justice Ramon C. Aquino
in the Ceremonial Hall, Malacanan Palace.

ENDNOTES

[1J “Editorial: Constitutional Convention
or Malacanang Kennel?” Philippine
Free Press, January 22, 1972,
accessed February 18, 2016, https://
philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 972/01/22/constitu tional-
convention-or-malacanang-kennel-
editorial-for-j anuary-22- 1 972/.

[2] Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Philippine Electoral
Almanac, rev. and exp. ed. (Manila:
PCDSPO, 2015), 115.

[3] David Wurfel, Filipino Politics:

Development and Decay (Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila Press), 116.

[4] Ibid.

[5] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral Almanac,

116-120.

[6] Rigoberto Tiglao, “The Consolidation of

the Dictatorship,” in Dictatorship and
Revolution: Roots of People’s Power,
eds. Aurora Javate-De Dios, Petronilo
Bn. Daroy, and Lorna Kalaw-Tirol
(Manila: Conspectus Foundation Inc.,
1988), 26.

[7] Rosalinda Pineda Ofreneo, The

Manipulated Press: A History of
Philippine Journalism Since 1945
(Mandaluyong City: Cacho Hermanos
Inc., 1984), 135.

[8] D. H. Soriano et al., The Roces Family,

Publishers: With a History of the
Philippine Press (Quezon City: Islas
Filipinas Publishing, 1987), 125;
Dominador D. Buhain, A History of
Publishing in the Philippines (Quezon
City: Rex Book Store, 1998), 98.

[9] Gerald Sussman, “Politics and the

Press: The Philippines Since Marcos,”
Philippine Studies 36, no. 4 (1988):
495.

[10J Tiglao, “The Consolidation of the
Dictatorship,” 30.

[11] Ibid. 29.

[12] Wurfel, Filipino Politics, 204.

[13] Ibid. ,205.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid., 208-209.

[16] Ibid. ,206.

[17] Manuel F. Martinez, Aquino Vs.
Marcos: The Grand Collision (Quezon
City: Manuel F. Martinez, 1987), 342.

[18] Ibid., 340-341.

[19] Emmanuel S. de Dios, “The Erosion

221

of the Dictatorship,” in Dictatorship
and Revolution: Roots of People’s
Power, eds. Aurora Javate-de Dios,
Petronilo Bn. Daroy, and Lorna Kalaw-
Tirol (Metro Manila: Conspectus
Foundation, 1988), 70.

[20] Ibid.

[21] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 122.

[22] Ibid., 125.

[23] Patricio Abinales and Donna Amoroso,
State and Society in the Philippines
(Pasig City: Anvil Publishing, 2005),
217.

[24] Ibid., 219; Benigno Aquino Jr.,
“Jabidah! Special Forces of Evil,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, March 28, 1968, accessed
November 27, 2015, http://www.
gov.ph/1968/03/28/jabidah-spedal-
forces-of-evil-by-senator-benigno-s-
aquino-jr/; Proclamation No. 1081 s.
1972 (September 21, 1972); “Third
Republic,” Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines, accessed
November 27, 2015, http://www.gov.
ph/featured/third-republic/.

[25] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 217.

[26] Ibid., 217 and 219.

[27] Ibid. ,219.

[28] Manuel Quezon III, “The Road to
EDSA,” Today, February 25, 1996,
accessed February 22, 2016, http://
mlq3 .tumblr.com/post/34 1 5013093/
the-road-to-edsa.

[29] Gregg Jones, Red Revolution: Inside
the Philippine Guerrilla Movement
(Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1989),
225-226.

[30] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 220.

[31] De Dios, “The Erosion of the
Dictatorship,” 128.

[32] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 220.

[33] Ibid.

[34] Ibid.

[35] Quezon, “The Road to EDSA,” Today,
February 25, 1996, accessed February
18, 2016, http://mlq3.tumblr.com/
post/341 5013093/the-road-to-edsa.

[36] Katherine Ellison, Imelda: Steel
Butterfly of the Philippines (Lincoln,
NE: iUniverse, Inc., 1988), 206.

[37] “One can never justify any violation
of rights’: John Paul II stands up to a
dictator,” GMA Neivs Online, April
27, 2014, accessed February 16, 2016,
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/
story/35 858 1/lifestyle/one-can-never-
justify-any-violation-of-rights-john-
paul-ii-stands-up-to-a-dictator.

[38] Alfred W. McCoy, Closer than
Brothers: Manhood at the Philippine
Military Academy (London and New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press,
1999), 226.

[39] “Editorial: If,” Philippine Free
Press, August 23, 1986, https://
philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 986/08/23/if-editorial-
august-23-1986/.

[40] “Aide confirms illness of Marcos,” The
New York Times, December 4, 1984,
accessed February 10, 2016, http://
www. nytimes.com/1984/12/04/world/
aide-confirms-illness-of-marcos.html.

[41] “Marcos reported stricken by fatal
illness,” Chicago Tribune, October
18, 1985, accessed February 10,

2016, http://articles.chicagotribune.
com/1 985-1 0-28/news/8503130824_l_
philippine-president-ferdinand-marcos-

222

lower-plateau-presidential-election.

[42] “Marcos seriously ill with rare disease
lupus, U.S. sources say,” Los Angeles
Times, January 17, 1986, accessed
February 10, 2016, http://articles.
latimes.com/1986-01-17/news/mn-
907_l_rare-disease.

[43] Wurfel, Filipino Politics, 235.

[44] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 123.

[45] Benjamin Muego, “The Executive
Committee in the Philippines:
Successors, Power Brokers, and Dark
Horses,” Asian Survey 23, no. 11
(November 1983):11 59.

[46] Ibid.

[47] Ibid., 1167.

[48] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 128-129.

[49] Carolina G. Hernandez,
“Reconstituting Political Order,” in
Crisis in the Philippines: The Marcos
Era and Beyond, ed. John Bresnan
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press, 1986), 182.

[50] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 130.

[51] James K. Boyce, The Political Economy
of Growth and Impoverishment in the
Marcos Era, (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 1993), 347.

[52] The Green Revolution was a strategy
of introducing new rice technologies
to Philippine agriculture, utilizing
scientific research of international
agencies and applying it to Philippine
crops such as rice.

[53] Boyce, Growth and Impoverishment in
the Marcos Era, 90-91.

[54] John M. Nelson, Economic Crisis
and Policy Choice: The Politics of
Adjustment in the Third World

(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press, 1990), 232.

[55] Ibid., 233.

[56] Boyce, Growth and Impoverishment in
the Marcos Era, 169-170.

[57] Ibid., 210.

[58] Nelson, Economic Crisis and Policy
Choice, 232.

[5 9] Boyce, Groivth and Impoverishment in
the Marcos Era, 210.

[60] Ibid., 211.

[61] Ibid., 180.

[62] Jeffrey Riedinger, Agrarian Reform in
the Philippines: Democratic Transitions
and Redistributive Reform (Palo Alto,
CA: Stanford University Press, 1995),
130.

[63] Boyce, Growth and Impoverishment in
the Marcos Era, 212.

[64] Nelson, Economic Crisis and Policy
Choice, 232.

[65] Boyce, Growth and Impoverishment in
the Marcos Era, 205.

[66] Ibid.

[67] Ibid., 348.

[68] Raymond Bonner, Waltzing with
a Dictator: The Marcoses and the
Making of American Policy (New York,
NY: Times Books, 1987), 264.

[69] Ibid., 265.

[70] Ibid., 2 67.

[71] Ibid.

[72] Ibid., 265.

[73] Wurfel, Filipino Politics, 238.

[74] Abinales and Amoroso, State and
Society in the Philippines, 219; Aquino,
“Jabidah! Special Forces of Evil,”
http://www.gov.ph/1968/03/28/jabidah-
special-forces-of-evil-by-senator-
benigno-s-aquino-jr/; Proclamation No.
1081 s. 1972; “Third Republic,” http://
www.gov.ph/featured/third-republic/.

223

[75] Tiglao, “The Consolidation of the
Dictatorship,” 66.

[76] Teodoro M. Locsin, “The Conscience
of the Filipino: The Sacrifice,”
Philippine Free Press Online, August
20, 1986, accessed February 16, 2016,
https://philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 986/08/20/the-conscience-of-the-
filipino-the-sacrifice- 1986/.

[77] Ibid.

[78] Gemma Nemenzo Almendral, “The
Fall of the Regime,” in Dictatorship
and Revolution: Roots of People’s
Power, eds. Aurora Javate-de Dios,
Petronilo Bn. Daroy, and Lorna Kalaw-
Tirol (Metro Manila: Conspectus
Foundation, 1988), 176.

[79] Ibid., 180.

[80] Ibid.

[81] Ibid., 177.

[82] Ibid., 185.

[83] Wurfel, Filipino Politics, 296.

[84] David G. Timberman, A Changeless
Land: Continuity and Change in
Philippine Politics (Singapore: Institute
of Southeast Asian Studies, 1991), 131.

[85] “Diary of Salvador Laurel,” Philippine
Diary Project, June 12, 1985, https://
philippinediaryproject.wordpress.
com/1 985/06/12/june-12-l 985/.

[86] Wurfel, Filipino Politics, 183.

[87] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 132.

[88] Almendral, “The Fall of the Regime,”

200.

[89] Ibid., 201.

[90] Ibid.

[91] “Table: Composition and Distribution
of U.S. Observer Delegations for

the February 7, 1986 Presidential
Elections, January 15 to February 15,
1986,” from the reconstructed files of

COMELEC, Office of the President/
National Media Production Center-
International Center, and Embassy of
the Philippines, Washington, D.C.

[92] COMELEC Employees’ Union,
“COMELEC UNION: 1986 poll
employees’ walkout provided spark
for EDSA People Power Revolt,”
InterAksyon.com, February 24, 2013,
accessed February 11, 2016, http://
www.InterAksyon.com/anic\d55746l
comelec-union--1986-poll-employees-
walkout-provided-spark-for-edsa-
people-power-revolt.

[93] Reynaldo Santos, “1986 COMELEC
Walkout Not about Cory or Marcos,”
Rappler, February 25, 2013, accessed
February 15, 2016, http://www.
Rtfpp/er.com/nation/politics/elections-
201 3/22582-1 986-comelec-walkout-
not-about-cory-or-marcos.

[94] International Observer Delegation, A
Path to Democratic Renewal: A Report
on the February 7, 1986 Presidential
Election in the Philippines, accessed
February 17, 2016, http://pdf.usaid.
gov/pdf_docs/PNABK494.pdf.

[95] Nick Joaquin (Quijano de Manila),

The Quarter of the Tiger Moon: Scenes
from the People Power Apocalypse
(Manila: Book Stop, 1986), 11.

[96] Leszek Buszynski, Gorbachev and
Southeast Asia (New York, NY:
Routledge, 1992), https://books. google.
com.ph/books?id=x-JXAwAAQBAJ
&pg=PT90&dq=soviet+union+amba
ssador+negotiate+for+marcos8dil=e
n&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwib46Wvl_7
KAhUj6aYKHZiDC00Q6AEIGjAA#
v=onepage&q=soviet%20union%20
ambassador%20negotiate%20for%20
marcos&f=false.

224

[97] Joaquin, The Quartet of the Tiger
Moon, 13.

[98] McCoy, Closer than Brothers, 231.

[99] Ibid., 225.

[100] Ibid., 227.

[101] Ibid., 229-230.

[102] Ibid., 232.

[103] Ibid., 237.

[104] Ibid., 233.

[105] Ibid., 233-234.

[106] Ibid., 241.

[107] Ibid., 237-238.

[108] Ibid., 238.

[109] Ibid., 241.

[110] Ibid., 243.

[111] Joaquin, Quartet of the Tiger
Moon, 19.

[112] McCoy, Closer than Brothers, 244.

[113] Ibid., 245.

[114] Angela Stuart-Santiago, “Chronology
of a Revolution,” accessed February 18,
2016, http://edsarevolution.com/dayl .
htm.

[115] Cory Aquino was informed by Bel
Cunanan, Ibid.

[116] McCoy, Closer than Brothers 246.

[117] Joaquin, The Quartet of the Tiger
Moon, 19.

[118] Edwin Lacierda, “Where were you?”
Rappler, February 25, 2015, accessed
February 17, 2016, http://www.
Rtfpp/er.com/views/imho/84991-edsa-
revolution-edwin-lacierda.

[119] Wurfel, Filipino Politics, 305.

[120] Joaquin, The Quartet of the Tiger
Moon, 62.

[121] Ibid., 44.

[122] McCoy, Closer than Brothers, 244.

[123] Ibid., 248.

[124] Stuart-Santiago, “Chronology of a
Revolution,” http://edsarevolution.com/
dayl.htm.

[125] Ibid.

[126] McCoy, Closer than Brothers, 251.

[127] Ibid.

[128] Ibid., 250.

[129] Santiago, “Chronology of the
Revolution,” http://edsarevolution.com/
day3.htm.

[130] Ibid.; McCoy, Closer than Brothers,

251.

[131] McCoy, Closer than Brothers, 251-

252.

[132] Santiago, “Chronology of the
Revolution,” http://edsarevolution.com/
day3.htm.

[133] “Military reveals arson, bombing plot
during Marcos’ last days with Am-
Philippines,” Associated Press, March
6, 1986, accessed February 22, 2016,
http ://www. apnewsarchive .com/198 6/
Military-Reveals-Arson-Bombing-Plot-
during-Marcos-Last-Days-With-AM-
Philippines/id-6f34fa5e77ac9e7467255
2beed788564.

[134] Beth Day Romulo, Inside the Palace:
The Rise and Fall of Ferdinand and
Imelda Marcos, (Feffer & Sons, 1987),
223-225.

[135] Bryan Johnson, Four Days of
Courage: The Untold Story of the Fall
of Marcos (Toronto: McClelland and
Stewart, 1987), 267.

225

Philippine Political Protest

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, SASHA MARTINEZ, AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

[This essay was originally published on
the Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines website to commemorate
the 30th anniversary of the People Power
Revolution, February 25, 2016]

2016 marks the 30th anniversary of the
People Power Revolution. During those
momentous four days of February 1986,
millions of Filipinos, along Epifanio de los
Santos Avenue (EDSA) in Metro Manila,
and in cities all over the country, showed
exemplary courage and stood against, and
peacefully overthrew, the dictatorial regime
of President Ferdinand E. Marcos. More than
a defiant show of unity — markedly, against
a totalitarian rule that had time and again
proven that it would readily use brute force
against any and all dissenters — People Power
was a reclaiming of liberties long denied. The
millions that gathered for the 1986 People
Power Revolution — the culmination of a
series of public protests, often dispersed if at
all given leave — was a nation wresting itself,
as one, back from a dictator.

The four-day demonstration along EDSA
was a manifestation of the discontent and
furies that began with the parliament of
the streets during Marcos’ totalitarian rule,
as Filipinos began, determinedly, to shake
off the subjugation. But, the players of this
revolution, at the start, knew only to gather;
only in EDSA, at the height of the marches
and within the multitude of citizens, stand as
one begin to coalesce as a campaign. From its
beginnings as an immediate response to the
rigged results of the snap elections, and then
as a vigil to guard defecting top military men
from Marcos’ vengeful machinations, a show
of support heartily encouraged by the Catholic
Church; to streets gradually teeming with
people to quietly face off with armored tanks,
a confrontation of linked arms and prayers
and flowers and songs — the four days of
EDSA People Power in itself was an exemplar
of the evolution of the Philippine protest.

On February 20, 1986, Marcos proclaimed
himself victor of the snap elections, and
was set to retain the presidency; on the

same day, Corazon C. Aquino led a people’s
victory rally at Luneta and called for civil
disobedience, which included the boycotting
of known Marcos-crony institutions. Two
million people took up the cause with her at
that rally; stocks of singled-out companies
fell the very next day. Marcos responded
with the threat of reinstating Martial Law,
should Cory Aquino lead a nationwide strike;
he, too, orchestrated a mass demonstration
of support — reports emerged that twelve
million pesos had been earmarked to pay
supporters to attend a proclamation rally in
his honor at Luneta.

On February 22, Defense Minister Juan
Ponce Enrile, who was once at the center
of the declaration of Martial Law in 1972,
discovered a plot to implicate him and officers
involved in the Reform the Armed Forces
Movement in a coup. Faced with only two
options — dispersing or regrouping — Enrile
chose the latter as the “more honorable”
option. He announced his defection from
Marcos, alongside Chief of Staff Fabian Ver’s
deemed successor, Lieutenant General Fidel

V. Ramos, from within Camp Aguinaldo
and Camp Crame. The Catholic Church
announced their support of the two, and
enjoined people via radio broadcast to
provide aid and, for all purposes, a human
cordon to guard them against anticipated
counter-offensives. Soon enough, the base
and its surroundings were teeming with
citizens. Marcos denounced Enrile and
Ramos, but speedily changed the venue of
his inauguration to Malacanan Palace; there
he would be sworn in as president yet again,
but this time surrounded by nothing more
than courtiers tied to his pursestrings. Back
in EDSA, that first night: Close to a hundred
thousand held vigil — a number that would
only swell.

On February 23, Enrile and Ramos met
along EDSA, surrounded and protected by
a growing number of supporters eager for
what already seemed then as a fomenting
revolution. But Marcos and his remaining
officials had mobilized forces still under
his command: Columns of armored tanks
formed barricades along EDSA, with heavily

PHOTO: Citizens continue to march to EDSA as individuals or as organized groups with their own safety rope,
provisions and banners. Photo by Nestor Barido, People Power: The Philippine Revolution of 1986.

227

armed battalions as escort. Thus began the
banded Filipinos’ show of force — through
song and slogans; through earnest extensions
of friendship to hard-faced soldiers; through
the flashing of the Laban sign — symbol
of Cory Aquino’s campaign and of the
movement that carried her; through prayers
and linked arms and rosaries, human
barricades, and flowers.

On February 25, Corazon C. Aquino was
sworn in as the elected President, effectively
reinstating democracy following decades
of the totalitarian rule of the Marcoses.
Democracy was swept in through the swell
of a unified crowd — and it was this tide of
the populace that would fully drive out the
dictator from his Palace, stealing out of the
country that wanted it no longer and that
which could finally act on it.

Revolutions often do not erupt and resolve in
a matter of days — but the events of February
1986 forever altered the course of our
nation’s history; it showcased to the world
the singular strength of the Filipino people.

promises of upward mobility from the
benevolent colonizer.

In the 1920s and the 1930s, the protests were
manifestations of racial tensions between
Filipinos and and Americans: when a Filipino
lettuce picker in California died at the hands
of Caucasian workers, 15,000 people flocked
to Luneta for a memorial service that turned
into a protest rally demanding independence
from the United States; students of the
Manila North High School instigated rallies
for the dismissal of an American teacher who
insulted her students. These rallies would
serve as the foundation of unified and more
centralized movements grounded on civil
disobedience, calling for Philippine liberty.

On July 31, 1931, before the United States
Congress passed the Hare-Hawes-Cutting Act
of 1933 — the law that would set in motion
the decolonization of the Philippines — U.S.
Senator Harry B. Hawes of Missouri traveled
to Manila to gauge the people’s sentiment

That pivotal national march along EDSA
is only foremost among a long tradition of
political demonstrations. For more than a
century, Filipinos have been taking their
grievances to the streets. One of the earliest
recorded protests was in 1903, staged by the
first workers’ union in the country, calling
for an eight-hour working day and for the
recognition of May 1 as a public holiday. In
the decades that followed, in a Philippines
under American rule, the streets were the
stage to air grievances about unfulfilled

PHOTO: A Filipino street demonstration calling
for the United States to give the Philippines its
independence. Circa early 1930s. Photo from Museo
ni Manuel L. Quezon via indiohistorian.

OPrr

Wtf

228

firsthand. What he found was a demonstration
and testimonial calling for national
independence held in front of the Legislative
Building. In a few years, the Legislative
Building (now the National Museum) would
be itself witness to the inauguration of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines, and
the swearing in of the first elected Filipino
President and Vice President. 250,000 men,
women, and children turned out to meet the
new Commonwealth, either as marchers in
the parade or as spectators on the sidelines.

The protest stands as a crucial part of
Philippine political — of democratic, exercise.
In their finer moments, the demonstrations
were a populace banding together; else, they
were stages upon which one fought for rights
deemed maligned. Throughout the American
Occupation, workers in the provinces
would take to the streets to demand better
treatment and to air outrage against the
state. The protesters were inspired by the civil
disobedience movement in India, choosing
to boycott pro-American establishments and
refusing to pay taxes to what they deemed
as an impostor government. Some protests,
however, degenerated into armed conflict. At
one point, they faced off with the Philippine
Constabulary in and around Manila in a
violent uprising, which resulted in heavy
casualties and the organic disbandment of
workers’ unions.

The Japanese Occupation did what it could
to stifle demonstrations feebly coming to
life. But this crackdown on unions often
drove members who’d evaded arrest to join
the larger Hukbong Bayan Laban sa Hapon
Movement (HUKBALAHAP; The Nation’s
Army Against the Japanese).

With democracy reinstated after the war, the
laborers’ protests speedily gained strength:
a 50,000-strong delegation marched to
Malacanan Palace only a month after the
Japanese surrendered, demanding better
conditions for workers, the release of
imprisoned union leaders, and a 60-40 profit
sharing system in the provinces. President
Sergio Osmena met their demands.

The onset of the Marcos administration would
witness a more dynamic philosophy to protests;
these demonstrations would continue to evolve
as the Marcos presidency transformed into a
dictatorship. On April 28, 1969, the Filipino
Agrarian Reform Movement (FARM) —
composed of intellectuals, journalists, and
professionals who were sympathetic to the
workers’ cause — launched a massive protest
known as the Land Justice March in Tarlac,
calling for land reform in Central Luzon.
The protest march was supposed to end at
Malacanang, but President Marcos flew to
meet the protesters at Camp Aquino, Tarlac.
After he agreed to most of their demands,
the Land Justice March dissolved. During
this time, FARM also staged a 93-day sit-in
in front of Congress for better conditions in
peasant communities.

Just two years later, in May 1967, Lapiang
Malaya — a movement David Sturvenant
describes as “a 40,000-member organization
much given to ornate uniforms, patriotic
posturing, and martial Rizal Day rallies” —
called on Marcos to step down; they wanted
to take his place. On May 20, more than 500
members were gathered at Lapiang Malaya’s
headquarters along Taft Avenue in Pasay
City, supposedly to participate in a parade-
demonstration. The Philippine Constabulary

229

PHOTO: Thirty-two Lapiang Malaya members were killed, as against one PC soldier. Photo from the Philippines
Free Press Magazine.

repeatedly attempted to break up the assembly,
but eventually tensions rose to the point of
violence. In what The Manila Times referred
to as “Bloody Sunday,” 32 bolo-wielding
members were slaughtered by Constabulary
troops armed with rifles. 358 more were
arrested and taken by the Constabulary to
Camp Crame in Quezon City.

In an attempt to stave off the criticism that
it had overreacted, the Constabulary came
out with a series of dubious intelligence
reports linking the sect to the communists.
The Marcos administration’s treatment
of the Lapiang Malaya protest — turning
it into a massacre of 32 farmers, with
the Constabulary revealed to be virtually
unchecked — was the first major item in the
administration’s track record against free
assembly. Lewis E. Gleeck Jr. writes of Bloody
Sunday: “The significant accomplishments of
the administration were suddenly diminished
by a grave failure in judgment on the part
of the Philippine Constabulary (PC), which
massacred 32 members of Lapiang Malaya,
a bolo-armed group of uneducated fanatics
who had carelessly been allowed to set up
headquarters only a few kilometers distant

from Malacanang. When the misguided
group was called upon to sheath their bolos
and disperse, they refused, and the PC
charged them with rifles blazing, destroying
not only the bolomen, but staining the
reputation of the Constabulary and the
Marcos government. This was an example
of mistaken judgment that should have cost
those who issued the order at least reduction
in rank, but no visible disciplinary measures
were taken. As [Rafael] Salas and later
[Francisco] Tatad would lament, no Filipino
official ever accepted responsibility for
failure or errors, let alone resigned as a result
of disasters suffered under his command.”

It was the Lapiang Malaya massacre that
impelled staunch Marcos critic Senator
Benigno S. Aquino Jr. to describe the
Philippines thusly: “A land consecrated
to democracy but run by an entrenched
plutocracy. Here, too, are a people whose
ambitions run high, but whose fulfillment
is low and mainly restricted to the self-
perpetuating elite. Here is a land of privilege
and rank — a republic dedicated to equality
but mired in an archaic system of caste.”
Democracy had, observes Manuel L. Quezon

230

Ill, “survived the Huk rebellion; and yet, even
the beneficiaries of the relative stability of the
mid-Fifties to mid-Sixties left an increasingly
better-educated and cosmopolitan urban
middle class in discontent.”

* *

Students, who would eventually form a
key cornerstone of the Philippine political
protest, did not take to demonstrations until
the late 1960s. For the most part, they were
politically passive — a condition cultivated
by the prevailing political culture then; the
marked conservativism of the era, itself
bolstered by Filipino values; as well as an
education system that strongly promoted
harmony between the citizenry and the
government, especially considering that the
latter signed on 15,000 new hires every year.
Quirino Samonte writes:

“—what are the prospects of an activist vis-a-
vis the status quo? For those who defy the law,
the price can be high indeed as exemplified
by those who chose to cast their lot with the
‘Huks’— a rebellious movement of peasants
that had its roots in the social and economic
injustices of agriculture’s tenancy system, but
which has since become the feeding ground
of Communist agitators.”

And yet, with changing political currents
and shifting social mores, campuses would
soon thrive as activist hubs. The 1960s saw
a resurgence of nationalism among college
students, who demonstrated against a
spectrum of issues — from US imperialism,
as seen in the deployment of Philippine
troops to the Vietnam War, to the US military
bases dotting the Philippines; to specific.

sector-based issues that paralleled workers’
movements decades prior. The relatively
insular but undoubtedly more sweeping
issue at the heart of many a student outrage
were individual school policies: school

administrations would fail to respond to
demands of lowered tuition fees, of granting
independence to student organizations and
publications, and of improving facilities and
the curriculum. Campus activism found
campaigns in the widening gap between the
rich and the poor, best exemplified by the
divide between the working students of the
proletariat and the collective elite of a handful
of Manila schools, both public and private —
hand in hand with this were the proliferation
of “diploma mills” within the capital. Eva
Lotta-Hedman and John Sidel observe:

“As the demand for formal qualifications
and accreditation increased on the urban
employment market, privately-run specialist
colleges and technical institutes packed
unprecedented numbers of fee-paying
students into overcrowded and sometimes
seriously dilapidated classrooms and even
condemned buildings in downtown Manila. For
example, the Philippine College of Commerce
counted among its rapidly growing student
population ‘mostly children of the lowest-
income groups— laborers, janitors, carpenters,
even laundrywomen.”’

Manila was overrun with the children of the
laboring classes, outraged at institutions, at
society, and at the state. All of this roundly
grew into a pitch, the calls for reform and
demonstrations of discontent galvanizing
into solid movements. By the late 1960s,
Lotta-Hedman and Sidel note, students
would, as collectives, picket campuses, march

231

in the streets of Manila, and demonstrate
outside Congress:

“Whilst this wave of student activism focused
but brief attention on ‘dialogue’ and ‘reform’
at the top of college administrations as well
as national government, it also left behind a
battle-scarred downtown area where buildings
with broken and boarded-up windows
remained a powerful testimony to the moment
of struggle, thus recalling fragments of
collective memory from the amnesia of history
through lived experience itself.”

The culture of activism, with its reformists
and its radicals, would only strengthen; there
was power in the demonstration, of making
one’s voice heard in a disruptive mass; one
would not be ignored. Soon enough, campus
activism would branch out, coalesce among
classes, and reach out to integrate plights
other than theirs: the provincial poor, the
working class.

The power of the masses, led by a youth
made aware of their ability to compel the
state to stop and listen, would reach a bloody
climax in 1970, with what would be recorded
in our history books as the First Quarter
Storm. Toward the end of 1969; Ferdinand
E. Marcos won an unprecedented full second
term as president in, Lewis Gleeck Jr. writes,
“the most violent and fraudulent campaign
the country had ever seen.” At this point,
fervent calls for a revolution were not isolated
to reformists and radicals, but involved
conservative circles as well. Discontent was
building solidarity: sympathizers from all
walks of life would link arms and protest
an increasingly unpopular and thoroughly
objectionable administration. The reelection

of a president no one wanted any longer
brought in a tide of outrage, one that lasted
and lingered for three months, marked by
often violent demonstrations: “The radical
students, already disdainful of a political
system dominated by elitist, ideologically
indistinguishable parties, reacted to Marcos’
tainted reelection with a vengeance.”

The First Quarter Storm officially began on
January 26, 1970, on the streets surrounding
Congress, where Marcos delivered the first
State of the Nation Address (SONA) of
his second term. Student organizations,
spearheaded by the National Union of
Students of the Philippines and with the
support of workers and members of the urban
poor, crafted a manifesto in preparation for
the SONA; a permit to rally was applied
for, and some 20,000 people trooped to
Congress. They were met, however, by a cadre
of uniformed men in battle gear garlanding
the streets, patrolling entry points. The rally
went on peacefully beneath the blare of
the sound system carrying Marcos’ SONA,
which boasted of the country’s improved
peace and order situation.

232

But when Marcos and his wife Imelda exited
the halls of Congress, demonstrators —
spurred on by agitators and harassed by
uniformed personnel — rushed at them,
throwing bottles and placards and stones
as they entered their limousine. The security
force pushed back at the demonstrators. The
mob was broken up by the police with batons;
students were beaten with truncheons.

Two accounts give opposing views of the
January 26 protest. Jose F. “Pete” Lacaba
sympathizes with the student demonstrators
in his classic, “The January 26 Confrontation:
A Highly Personal Account.” Lacaba was
outside with the students and described the
violence in detail: students were chased by
the police, hauled out of jeepneys, and beaten
with rattan sticks. Lacaba himself took a
blow to his waist from a policeman.

Kerima Polotan’s account, “The Long Week,”
tells a different story. From inside Congress,
she took fashion notes — a who’s who in
barong, coat and tie, or terno — and offered

snide remarks at the expense of members
of the opposition, such as Senators Benigno
“Ninoy” Aquino Jr. and Gerardo “Gerry”
Roxas. Her account of the violence outside
was taken from Manila Police District Chief
Colonel Gerardo Tamayo: one cop lost four
teeth, another received ten stitches on his
head, another sustained a nail in his knee.

On January 30, to protest the violent
dispersal of the January 26 student-led rally,
another demonstration was held in front of
Malacanan Palace — candles burned beside
an effigy of a coffin, to symbolize the death
of democracy. In the streets that radiated
from the Palace, more and more protesters
were gathering, marching toward the breach
in the gates; as security tried to break up
the mobs, doors would open to the rallyists,
second-floor windows opened revealing
strangers serving as frantic look-outs.
The “clean-up” of the street protests took
seven hours, with shows of solidarity in an
increasingly bloody evening punished by a
police force that did not distinguish between
protesters and sympathizers.
(In the meantime, Nick
Joaquin, notes: “That night,
an exodus of privilege made
ghost towns of the exclusive
villages in the suburbs; the
chi-chi crowd, fear in their
guts and guilt in their hearts,
holed up with their hysteria
in the big hotels, driven
there by the certainty that
Forbes Park and Bel-Air and
Dasmarinas and Magallanes
would be set afire by an
avenging people.”)

233

Rallyists retaliated with
force. They started fires
and destroyed property;
a fire truck was rammed
into the Palace gates. At
Mendiola, students armed
with bamboo sticks faced off
against a battalion wielding
heavy artillery.

Demonstrators were

killed — a 23-year-old

student, performing in a
mock trial of a Marcos effigy,
was shot in the head — several
others wounded in clashes
that ran late into the night.

Marcos, in his diaries, wrote
about the siege of his Palace:

"...demonstrators numbering
about 10,000 students
and laborers stormed Malacahan Palace,
burning part of the medical building, crashing
through Gate 4 with a fire truck that had been
forcibly commandeered by some laborers
and students amidst shouts of ‘Mabuhay
Dante!” and slogans from Mao-Tse-Tung, the
new Communist Party of the Philippines and
the New People's Army. The rioters sought
to enter Malacanang but the Metropolitan
Command (METROCOM) of the Philippine
Constabulary and the Presidential Guards
repulsed them towards Mendiola Bridge,
where in an exchange of gunfire, hours later,
four persons were killed and scores from both
sides injured. The crowd was finally dispersed
by tear gas grenades.”

Though the protracted battle between
authorities and students who stormed the

Palace would conclude by dawn, the First
Quarter Storm would only escalate, sustained
by a citizenry disillusioned and outraged by
the state’s intolerant and violent responses to
expressions of democracy.

A year after the First Quarter Storm, in the
lead-up to the 1971 midterm elections, UP
students, supported by faculty members and
non-academic personnel, staged a sympathy
strike in support of Pasang Masda, an
organization of jeepney drivers that protested
gas price hikes. The students occupied the
Diliman campus and blockaded its main roads
through the use of a new weapon of protest:
the human barricade. This nine-day uprising
was known as the “Diliman Commune.”
Some residents in the area banded together
and hunted down the radical students in the

234

defense of order and their property rights.
President Marcos ordered the Philippine
Constabulary Metropolitan Command
to retake the campus. The Philippine
Constabulary went to UP and dismantled
the barricades; three students died in the
violence that ensued. The demonstrations
in UP Diliman ended only after the school
administration accepted some of the demands
of the students. The military siege was put to
a halt following a recommendation made
by university president Salvador Lopez to
President Marcos.

One contemporary observer noted that after
the Diliman commune, “protest classes,
boycotts, demonstrations became almost a
daily spectacle that would beset the University
until the declaration of martial law.”

Lotta-Hedman and Sidel note that, given
“the mounting political activism that swept
Manila campuses during this decade, students
increasingly left their classrooms throughout
the University belt not only to shop for food or
school supplies, or watch movies, but to join
in the mass demonstrations that filed through
or converged upon downtown. As students,
faculty members, workers, and peasants
alike — and sometimes, together — launched
new radical organisations and engaged in
concerted collective campaigns during the
course of the decade. Plaza Miranda — ‘the
crossroads of the nation’ — became a familiar
destination not just for Nazareno devotees,
downmarket clients, and during election
years, political candidates, but also for mass
activists-as well as the Metropolitan Anti-
Riot squads organised for the occasion.”

Located no more than a kilometer from
Malacanan Palace, Plaza Miranda was the
largest venue from which rallyists could
be physically close to the residence of the
country’s chief executive, whether in loyal
support or oppositionist denunciation. In
the era of grand demonstrations and mass
mobilizations, National Artist for Literature
Nick Joaquin, in his Almanac for Manilenos,
described Plaza Miranda as “the crossroads
of the nation, the forum of the land.”
President Ramon Magsaysay, arguably the
most popular of our postwar chief executives,
famously recognized the square as a gauge of
public opinion when he asked a proponent
of a policy or project: “Can we defend this
at Plaza Miranda?” Far removed from the
closed, air-conditioned rooms of Congress or
cushioned seats in public buildings, bringing
an issue to Plaza Miranda was the ultimate
act of transparency and accountability, where
the people could question their government.

PHOTO: Liberal Senators after the Plaza Miranda
bombing. Photo from the Philippines Free Press.

235

A year following the First Quarter Storm, the
political situation in Manila and throughout
the country was at a fever pitch. Growing
disenchantment with Marcos put his political
future at stake with the 1971 midterm
Senatorial elections — the traditional dividing
line between a president’s continued political
relevance or reduction to lame duck. The
sons of Presidents Osmena and Roxas, united
under the Liberal Party, led the opposition to
President Ferdinand Marcos. Senators Sergio
Osmena Jr. and Gerardo Roxas were both
victims in the Plaza Miranda bombing, which
would indelibly link the Liberal Party of the
Philippines to the public square’s identity as
the forum of Philippine democracy.

On August 21, 1971, at the miting de avance
of the Liberal Party in Plaza Miranda, the
square became the scene of two simultaneous
grenade attacks that nearly liquidated the
party’s leadership, just as Senator Roxas,
Liberal Party President, was proclaiming his
party’s candidates for the City of Manila.
Among those who sustained serious injury
were: Roxas, Osmena, Senators Jovito

Salonga, Genaro Magsaysay, Eva Estrada-
Kalaw (a Nacionalista guest candidate of
the Liberal Party), and senatorial bets John
Henry Osmena and Ramon Mitra Jr. Roxas
would hold President Marcos responsible for
the attack:

“The Plaza Miranda incident has illustrated
beyond doubt that there is not a safe place
in the country where people may express
their views without having to face the perils
of assassination. I have only one message to
leaders, followers and the electorate: Nothing
will deter the LP nor dampen its determination
to win the mandate of the people this election.

We shall continue to fight for the right of our
citizenry. I am grateful to the Almighty for those
of us who were fortunate to have been spared.”

Widely considered the most blatant assault
on free speech and guaranteed democratic
rights at the time, many quarters believed
it to be masterminded by Marcos himself,
which led to increased opposition to his
administration. Three months later, the polls
resulted in a Senate sweep by the Liberals,
with only two Marcos allies making it into
the winner’s circle. The President’s alter
egos — Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile
and Secretary of Labor Bias Ople — were
among the losers.

The Marcos years, characterized by the
Machiavellian exercise of power preservation,
fomented political unrest: alleged graft and
corruption by the administration and her
cronies would worsen the disparity of wealth
and grow the gap between the extremely

236

wealthy and the very poor. Civilians took
to rioting, which fed the administration’s
hunger to be on the defensive and thus
respond with aggression.

This heightened sense of control meant the
suppression of civil liberties and before long,
President Ferdinand Marcos found himself
addressing the public, justifying the need for
power to be vested solely in his hands.

On the afternoon of September 21, 1972, the
last protest before the declaration of Martial
Law was held in Plaza Miranda. Sponsored
by Concerned Christians for Civil Liberties,
the demonstration was attended by a crowd
of 30,000 people from different sectors —
civic, religious, labor, student, and activist.

The September 23, 1972 declaration of Martial
Law planted the seeds of discontent that would
make dissent and revolution necessary — even
vital — to the restoration of democracy.

Urban protest did not vanish entirely, even
under Martial Law. On the day before
the Interim Batasang Pambansa elections,
for example, residents of Metro Manila
organized a show of support for the
incarcerated ex-Senator Ninoy Aquino, who
was the leader of the opposition candidates:
the noise barrage held on April 6, 1978, would
become one of the most famous protests of
the era. At 8:00 p.m., people went out into
the streets, making whatever noise they could
“to let Ninoy Aquino in his prison cell know
that the people had heard his message.” They
banged on pots and pans, honked their car
horns, and shouted their throats sore in
support of Ninoy and his party, Lakas ng
Bayan (LABAN; the People’s Power).

A period of relative quiet followed; but in
1983, the assassination of the foremost critic
of the Marcos dictatorship — the man who was
among those first arrested in the declaration
of Martial Law — revived the nation out of
inaction. Fifteen minutes after Ninoy Aquino
returned to the country after three years
of exile in the United States, he was dead
on the tarmac of the Manila International
Airport. Chairman of the National
Historical Commission of the Philippines,
Maria Serena I. Diokno, writes, “It was the
Aquino assassination, more than any other
event in the Marcos regime’s long history
of repression and violence, which moved
countless Filipinos, especially the once-timid
middle class, to awaken and jointly fight the
reality of dictatorship. For many it was, in the
words of a Makati businessman ‘. . . the spark
that gave us the courage to speak up.’ Indeed,
from that shocking moment on the tarmac
in August 1983 until the EDSA Revolution
in February 1986, numerous organizations
emerged to protest the iron strength of the
Marcos dictatorship.”

Until then, the country’s demonstrators had
been stilled under Martial Law, with the
regime unrelenting in its campaign to stifle
free speech, much less audacious displays of
opposition. But with Aquino’s assassination,
Filipinos took to the streets to honor the dead,
to cast their lot with the fallen hero. It was in
the streets of Manila, with Ninoy Aquino’s
funeral cortege escorted by millions, that the
Filipino people themselves undertook what
the dictatorship denied: The flag in front of
the Rizal Monument was lowered to half-
mast, in symbolic tribute from the Republic’s
protomartyr to its new martyr of democracy.
Diokno writes of the sea-change regarding

237

popular outrage that gained
strength on August 31, 1983:
“On that day, about two
million Filipinos turned out
to be counted; they joined
the procession, lined the
streets, displayed banners
and ribbons, and chanted all
throughout an eleven-hour
journey. The unprecedented
funeral set the tone for the
protest movement that was
to evolve. It was a movement
that in the next two years
increasingly challenged the
Marcos regime’s stockpile
of teargas, bullets, and
repressive presidential

decrees. In subsequent rallies
and varied mass actions,
demonstrators, linking arms
and bearing no weapons,
bravely faced the U.S.-
supplied arms of the state.”

PHOTO: The funeral procession of Ninoy Aquino. Note that the flag
had been defiantly lowered by the crowd as the truck carrying the bier
passed. Photo taken from Ninoy: The Willing Martyr.

The indignation and the
grief, fuelling the resurgence
of democratic expression,
spread across all sectors —
the country had once again
found a single banner
from which it could unite
and struggle, against the
innumerable abuses of the
Marcos regime. When before
efforts to mobilize the masses would come to
naught or prove at best to be ephemeral, the
anti-government protests following Ninoy’s
death would last months, and once again
bring to the fore movements that would
usher in more definitive campaigns for the

restoration of democracy in the Philippines.
Mark Thompson shares government
estimates of the upswell of protest inspired
by Ninoy’s murder: “165 rallies, marches,
and other demonstrations took place
between August 21 and September 30, 1983.

238

The largest was Aquino’s funeral procession
in Manila, which took eleven hours and was
attended by an estimated 2 million people.
Protest demonstrations continued into the
following year, with more than 100 held
between October 1983 and February 1984.
The biggest of these was the 120-kilometer
‘Tarlac to Tarmac’ run (from Aquino’s home
province to the international airport where
he was murdered), attended by an estimated
five hundred thousand people.” The protest
movement swept across socioeconomic
strata — even, notably, among the country’s
middle-class and sympathetic elite. In Ayala
Avenue, the country’s foremost financial
and business district, meetings, public
demonstrations, and protest marches
would be held weekly following the Aquino
assassination to the beat of ati-atihan drums,
and often under a blanket of yellow confetti
drifting from the buildings.

The murder of Ninoy Aquino during the
Marcos regime would set in motion the
beginning of the revolution that would
reclaim the country from the dictatorship.

Marcos would struggle to
maintain his control over
the people, even instigating
charades of democracy. On
February 7, 1 986, nationwide
snap elections were held
for the presidency and the
newly restored position
of vice president. The
contenders were the tandem
of Marcos and Arturo M.
Tolentino, versus Cory
Aquino, widowed spouse
of assassinated Ninoy, and
Salvador H. Laurel. Aquino
had proven her charismatic and emblematic
sway over the people just months prior; the
Cory Aquino for President Movement had
ensured for her 1 .2 million signatures calling
for her candidacy alone — a feat rendered
more remarkable given the suppressions of
the times. However, as the votes were tallied,
the Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
numbers showed Marcos and Tolentino
the winners, a result made official by the
Batasang Pambansa. As government tried
to rubberstamp its way to victory, a series of
astounding events began to grip the world’s
attention: computer operators tabulating
Comelec votes walked out; the bishops of
the Catholic Church issued a pastoral letter
saying a government that cheated was devoid
of legitimacy; Cory Aquino called for a
civil disobedience campaign and a boycott
of crony-owned corporations until the
opposition victory was recognized. Within
two weeks of the snap elections, multitudes
of demonstrators would fill the vast expanse
of EDSA calling for — and achieving — the
peaceful ouster of a dictator.

239

The Revolution of 1986
sparked a selfless sense of
community in multitudes,
rarely seen in such
demonstrations. Edwin
Lacierda, presidential

spokesperson of Cory’s son,

Benigno S. Aquino III, was
there to witness: “More than
a rally,” he recalls, “all of
us came to EDSA to break
bread and fellowship with
all who were willing to stand
in the line of fire and take the
bullet, as it were, for freedom
and change of government.”

When Jaime L. Cardinal Sin broadcasted
his famous message to gather at EDSA over
Radio Veritas, hundreds of thousands heeded
the call. Food was never a problem, thanks
to volunteer “food brigades;” there was
always a pot of rice, a pan of pancit, tins of
crackers to be passed around. When rumors
spread of a potential teargas attack, residents
near camps Crame and Aguinaldo scrambled
to provide protesters with wet handkerchiefs
and towels. People did not hesitate to
sacrifice their cars to barricade the advance
of the tanks; one owner simply shrugged off
the threat of losing his automobile and said,
“Some things are worth more.”

When the Malolos Congress — which

ushered in the birth of the First Philippine
Republic — was ratified, among the witnesses
was a delegation of Filipino soldiers who
had marched away from a Manila that they
had won but which was barred to them:

Spain refused to hand over the capital and
stronghold to the Filipinos who had survived
revolutions to overthrow 300 years of
rule and had since forged uneasy alliances
with Americans to secure victory. There,
witnessing the foundation of a true modern
state for Filipinos, was an army that had won
back the country, to no recognition of two
warring conquerors.

The old trope of paths not taken is one
examined by Nick Joaquin in his play El
Camino Real: One Emilio Aguinaldo reflects
upon his missed chance of taking back
Manila from the Spaniards sans the aid of
Americans by marching down El Camino
Real, the royal road — now the Coastal Road
that connects Manila’s south to Cavite.
There had lain before Aguinaldo the path of
true conquest — a path that reclaimed what
was rightfully the Filipinos’, a path that
could have been forged by Filipinos alone —
and Aguinaldo had not taken it. Joaquin,
through an imagining of Aguinaldo’s inner
life, opines on a Philippines that could have

240

PHOTO: An aerial photo shows six million devotees attending the
concluding mass of Pope Francis at the Quirino Grandstand in Manila.
Photo from Armed Forces of the Philippines/Philippine Air Force Public
Information Office.

been wrought had one man, leading a host
of others, marched down the path of kings.

But we Filipinos have known to take
confidently to the streets our devotions and
our yearnings, our furies. On streets we gather
to be heard, to be seen, by the powers that
be. We gather in thoroughfares to welcome
home triumphant athletes and venerated
celebrities; we sanctify the celebrity, trailing
after roving stages. When the sitting Pope
visits with the country’s Catholic faithful,
the roads are lined with often rain-drenched
thousands hopeful for a glimpse of, a wave
from, a benediction. We honor the dead,
close down arteries of the city to march after
a coffin inching to its final resting place. We
topple a dictator, even at the cost of our lives;
we rise up when the state threatens to turn its
back on its citizens.

figures, unfurl canvas sheets
emblazoned with slogans,
and chant battle cries; it is
these streets that hold us
as we stand vigil. We stand
upon the very streets we
lament on the day-to-day —
via debates, consciously
made or otherwise, pitting
inconvenience against

development — when we need
the Republic to listen; the
volume of people we scorn
in our daily tribulations
become brothers- and sisters-
in-arms when a goal must be
won for the citizenry. The commonplace, the
purely pragmatic — at its most fundamental:
A line, be it straight or weaving, that conveys
us from one point to another — becomes a
stage upon which revolutions spark. For on
and along roads — first cleared paths through
foliage and terra, and then lined dirt and
then gravel, and then asphalt and steel and
concrete — shooting through our archipelago,
Filipinos gather — collective movements

within all these centuries creating a true
cartography of Philippine democracy.

We rouse, we march, we rally. The same streets
that we cross to go to our schools and offices
and malls are the streets that hold us when
we craft papier mache facsimiles of public

241

The 1986 People Power
.Revolution

JUSTIN GATUSLAO AND JEAN ARBOLEDA

[This essay was originally published on
this website to commemorate the 27th
anniversary of EDS A, February 25, 2013]

2013 marks the 27th anniversary of the
1986 People Power Revolution. During these
momentous four days in February, Filipinos
showed exemplary courage and stood united
against a dictator. In honor of this milestone
in our nation’s history, the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic
Planning Office (PCDSPO) looks back into
the historic four-day revolution that restored
democracy in the Philippines through the
narrative of Kidlat Tahimik’s 1994 film opus,
Why is Yellow the Middle of the Rainbow ?

Esteemed Filipino filmmaker Kidlat
Tahimik’s film documents and records the
musings of father and son as they go through
the tumultuous days of February 1986. Each
tells a story that is deeply personal and also
profoundly significant in this nation’s history.
On February 7, 1986, nationwide snap

elections were held for the presidency and
the newly restored position of Vice President.
The contenders were the tandem of Ferdinand
E. Marcos and Arturo M. Tolentino of the
Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL), versus
Corazon C. Aquino, widowed spouse of
assassinated senator Benigno Aquino Jr. and
Salvador H. Laurel of United Nationalist
Democratic Organization (UNIDO). [1] In the
film, the young Kidlat gets an asthma attack
in anticipation of the elections. His father, the
elder Kidlat, has promised to take him along
when he casts his ballot. They arrive at a
small voting precinct in Baguio City and just
as he marks his ballot, the father motions for
his son to move away from behind him. He
casts his vote in and reveals to his son that it
is the “secrecy of the ballot that guarantees
that the will of the people is granted. Secrecy
is what protects voters.”

In the far-flung region of Benguet in the
Mountain Province, elections take place
as they do in other parts of the nation.

242

Surprised as they are to be afforded this
opportunity by a president who has ruled for
nearly two decades, people cast their votes
risking life and limb. The integrity of the
ballot afforded people hope that perhaps the
results yielded might deliver them from the
grip of a dictator. However, the Commission
on Elections (COMELEC) numbers show
Marcos and Tolentino the winners, a
result made official by the KBL-dominated
Batasan Pambansa. 121 As government tried
to rubberstamp its way to victory, a series of
astounding events began to grip the world’s
attention: computer operators tabulating
COMELEC votes walked out; [31 the bishops
of the Catholic Church issued a pastoral
letter saying a government that cheated was
devoid of legitimacy; Corazon C. Aquino
called for a civil disobedience campaign
and a boycott of crony-owned corporations
until the opposition victory was recognized.
Within two weeks of the February 7, 1986
snap elections, multitudes of demonstrators
would fill the vast expanse of Epifanio de
los Santos Avenue (EDSA) calling for the
peaceful ouster of a dictator.

However accelerated these events of
February 1986 may be, revolutions do not
take place overnight. The Marcos years,
characterized by the Machiavellian exercise
of power preservation, fomented political
unrest. Allegations of graft and corruption
against the administration and her cronies
would forge a disparity of wealth and grow
the gap between the extremely wealthy and
the very poor. 141 Civilians took to rioting
and fed the administration’s hunger to be
on the defensive and thus able to practice
aggression against them. This heightened
sense of control meant the suppression of

civil liberties and before long, President
Ferdinand E. Marcos found himself
addressing the public, justifying the need for
power to be vested solely in his hands. The
September 23, 1972 declaration of Martial
Law planted the seeds of discontent that
would make revolution necessary, even vital
to the restoration of democracy. 151

The 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution
gathered throngs of people, filling the
capital’s main artery. However, the spirit
of their movement didn’t remain contained
in the streets of Manila. Pockets of dissent
manifested nationwide creating a stir in
local communities and uniting the nation
in the desire to attain freedom. Cebuanos
and Davaoenos gathered in their own plazas,
packing streets with slogans and singing the
anthems of the revolution. All were guided by
the voice of Radio Veritas — the one station
whose dedication to truth helped topple the
regime. Many looked to this station as the
beacon of light. No doubt, People Power was
set ablaze elsewhere in the nation because of
the Veritas broadcasts.

While opposition groups formed outside the
capital, many people also went out of their
way to be counted. In the featured film, the
De Guia’s drive from Baguio to Manila just
as others would leave the comfort of their
homes to be counted in this movement.
People from all walks of life would converge
and even creeds were no hindrance to a
people standing united against a dictator.

During the 20th anniversary of the EDSA
People Power Revolution, the Philippine
Daily Inquirer published accounts of those
who had participated in the revolution

243

and among them was a touching story
of a Muslim who was tasked to organize
Company D:

“More than a hundred men and women
from Maharlika, the Quiapo mosque and the
Tandang Sora Muslim communities responded
to our call. We turned down the women and
warned the 85 men of Company D that not all
of us could return alive.”

Later, the account also describes how people
grew watchful of food and made sure that
pork was never served to their Muslim
brethren. Once, a truckload of food arrived
and as people made their way toward it,
the driver was quick to say, “for Muslims
only.” To the one recalling the story, this was
the definitive moment being Filipino was
most clear — that somehow away toward
belonging had been found.

These stories are few among many more
untold ones that we have not heard of
because often, EDSA is quickly reduced to
being a movement done in the capital or by
the big people in history. Clearly, this is not
the case.

When news of President Marcos leaving
the Palace reached Jaro, Iloilo, it was late at
night and yet the lights came on and residents
made their way toward the cathedral of
Jaro. Suddenly illuminated and with ringing
bells to boot, then 16-year-old high school
student, Ruby A. Dumalaog, stood in awe of
her town.

“I realized that what was happening at EDSA
was also happening in Jaro. Soldiers patrolling
the city shook hands with people on the

street. People who didn’t know each other
were embracing each other and crying. That
night, I realized that although the islands in the
Philippines are far apart, although we are far
away from EDSA, although we were not there
to face the tanks, in our hearts we are one, we
have one dream and we can be together."

ENDNOTES

[1J Gemma Nemenzo Almendral, “The
Fall of the Regime,” in Dictatorship
and Revolution: Roots of People’s
Power, eds. Aurora Javate-de Dios,
Petronilo Bn. Daroy, and Lorna Kalaw-
Tirol (Metro Manila: Conspectus
Foundation, 1988), 200-201.

[2] “Table: Composition and Distribution

of U.S. Observer Delegations for
the February 7, 1986 Presidential
Elections, January 15 to February 15,
1986,” from the reconstructed files of
COMELEC, Office of the President,
National Media Production Center-
International Center, and Embassy of
the Philippines, Washington, D.C.

[3] Reynaldo Santos, “1986 COMELEC

Walkout Not about Cory or Marcos,”
Rappler, February 25, 2013, accessed
February 15, 2016. http://www.
rappler.com/nation/politics/elections-
201 3/22582-1 986-comelec-walkout-
not-about-cory-or-marcos.

[4] James K. Boyce, The Political Economy

of Growth and Impoverishment in the
Marcos Era (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 1993), 347.

[5] Primitivo Mijares, The Conjugal

Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda
Marcos I (New York, NY: Union
Square Publications, 1986), 166.

244

utioe

ong>§ of EDSA

JUSTIN GATUSLAO AND JEAN ARBOLEDA

[This essay was originally published on
this ivebsite to commemorate the 27th
anniversary of EDSA, February 25, 2013]

Martial Law regime began with eerie silence,
in the wake of media outlets that were closed
down and long distance telephone lines that
were shut down in the middle of the night.
Government-sanctioned media stations
filled the ensuing void with an audio-visual
facade of cartoons and muzak. Musically-
speaking, the New Society would be more
like the Japanese Occupation, with a pop
twist. Combined with the bombast of the
Bagong Lipunan March, Martial Law was
accompanied by patriotic tunes imbued with
the ideology of the New Society — ”Ako
ay Pilipino” with its reference to “Dugong
Maharlika,” being an example.

For its part, the opposition appropriated
popular American music such as “Tie A
Yellow Ribbon ‘Round the Old Oak Tree”
and “How Much Is That Doggie In The

Window,” used to pillory the cronies of the
ruling regime. The opposition would respond
with the thundering beat of ati-atihan drums
at Ayala Avenue and in the massed ranks
willing to be teargassed in the ‘parliament of
the streets’, and would finally find its anthem
in “Bayan Ko,” whose purity was a stark
contrast to Handel’s “Messiah” (“And He
shall reign for ever and ever...”) at President
Ferdinand E. Marcos’ 1981 inaugural, or his
efforts to put forward a ‘We Are The World’-
style rendition of the National Anthem which
scandalized the nation.

When, in February 1986, Filipinos trooped
to the polls to throw out President Marcos,
only for the The Batasan Pambansa to
proclaim President Marcos the winner of
the snap elections, a Civil Disobedience
campaign was launched to show support for
his opponent, Corazon C. Aquino.

Then EDSA happened. This was a revolution,
but this was also a revolution accompanied

with a folk song, a jingle, a hymn, and jubilation
would be expressed through a dance.

“I have never seen a revolution like this. People
are dancing and singing. You see this in the
movies, in fiction. This is real.”

— Freddie Aguilar quotes a foreign
correspondent's observation on the People
Power Revolution.

Forever intertwined with Philippine history,
these five songs were played and replayed
during the four days of struggle in February
1986— over the radio, out in the streets. The
peaceful revolution found outlet in these
tunes: at once, a tender tribute to the beloved
country, yet also a resolute call to action. In
the strums of a guitar, or in a haunting melody,
this was the music that stirred people to
rise— evoking the injustices of the past, while
remaining hopeful for the future. These were
the songs which perfectly encapsulated the
swell of emotions of the time, and soon came
to embody the People Power Revolution.

— The Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office
(PCDSPO)

TIE A YELLOW RIBBON ‘ROUND THE OLD
OAK TREE

“Tie a yellow ribbon ‘round the old oak tree.
It’s been three long years
Do you still want me?”

Upon the suggestion of former Senator Eva
Estrada-Kalaw, Tony Orlando’s popular
song was originally intended to have been
the homecoming song for senator Benigno

“Ninoy” Aquino. Apt, for Ninoy had spent
the past three years in self-imposed exile in
the United States of America — however, he
was assassinated upon his arrival at Manila
International Airport, before the opening
bars of the song had even begun to play.

“A simple yellow ribbon’s what I need to set
me free.”

It was soon adopted by the opposition, and
the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution
bore witness to the power of yellow,
which adorned the streets in the form of
ribbons, pins, armbands, confetti, and other
paraphernalia.

After Radio Veritas was taken off the air, June
Keithley used these songs in her broadcasts
on Radyo Bandido, to help listeners identify
her with Radio Veritas:

BAYAN KO

“Aking adhika, makita kang sakdal laya,”

Perhaps no other song has expressed the
struggles of the nation so succinctly as this
kundiman, written by Jose Corazon de Jesus
and set to music by Constancio de Guzman
in the 1920s. What came to be known as the
definitive version of Bayan Ko was recorded
by Filipino artist Freddie Aguilar in 1979,
seven years before the revolution. In his own
words:

"When I was singing that song, without
accompaniment, beside the coffin of Ninoy
Aquino, I broke out in goose pimples. I was
thinking: ‘I am full of conceit. All I do is talk.
This man gave his life.’ From then on, I became

246

part of the protest scene— all the way until the
revolution, still singing Bayan Ko.”

After Corazon C. Aquino took her oath of
office as President of the Philippines, the crowd
erupted in cheers before eventually bursting into
song — the Lord’s Prayer and then the unofficial
anthem of protest: Bayan Ko.

“This things isn’t over yet, this revolution.
And people will keep on singing Bayan Ko in
EDSA.”

— Rofel G. Brion

After the Marcoses evacuated Malacanang,
civilians stormed the Palace. One civilian
recalls that, in the piano in dining hall of the
Palace, someone immediately began to play
Bayan Ko.

MAMBO MAGSAYSAY

This campaign jingle, written and composed
by Raul Maglapus and credited with sweeping
Ramon Magsaysay to the Presidency in the
50s, resurfaced in the 80s, after June Keithley
played the jazzy tune during her broadcasts to
boost morale. The lyrics were a subtle jab at
the rampant corruption and flagrant human
rights violations of the Marcos regime.

“Everywhere that you would look
Was a bandit or a crook
Peace and order was a joke
Til Magsaysay pumasok.

That is why, that is why
You will hear the people cry
Our democracy will die
Kung wala si Magsaysay.”

Magsaysay had run on a campaign to stamp
out corruption and strengthen the country’s
democratic institutions, in a stark contrast to
a fellow Ilocano who had done the opposite.

ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS

The 19th century hymn was also adopted
by the members of the 1986 People Power
Revolution. Intermittently played over
Radio Veritas, and later Radyo Bandido,
the solemn hymn served to encourage the
soldiers by reminding them of the unity of
the opposition.

HANDOG NG PILIPINO SA MUNDO

With the heartfelt lyrics of Jim Paredes of the
APO Hiking Society, written just after the
revolution, Handog ng Pilipino sa Mundo
became the collaborative effort of a group of
Filipino recording artists released in April 1986.

"Handog ng Pilipino sa mundo,

Mapayapang paraang pagbabago.
Katotohanan, kalayaan, katarungan
Ay kayang makamit na walang dahas.

Basta't magkaisa tayong lahat.”

The song evokes the sentiment of the
peaceful, non-violent revolution, and, as a
fitting tribute, the lyrics are inscribed on a
wall of the EDSA Shrine at the intersection
of EDSA and Ortigas Avenue.

247

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

iumo

Benigno S. Aquino III is the first:

• unmarried president in the history of the
country.

• president with no children.

• Deputy Speaker of the House of
Representatives to later become
president.

• marksman to become president since
Ferdinand E. Marcos (who belonged
to the University of the Philippines rifle
team).

• president since 1992 who was
inaugurated into office without having
been Vice President first.

• president since Diosdado Macapagal to
be elected as the candidate of the Liberal
Party. He is also the first president since
Macapagal not to have changed political
parties.

• post-EDSA president to exceed Garcia’s
1957 plurality (41.3%).

O Majority Presidents: Quezon (68%
in 1935 and 81.78% in 1941), Roxas

54% in 1946C, Quirino (51% in 1949),
Magsaysay (68.9% in 1953), Macapagal
(55% in 1961), Marcos (54.76% in 1965,
61.5% in 1969), Aquino (approximately
51%).

O Garcia was the only president elected
by plurality (41.3%) prior to 1972.

O The lowest plurality ever was Fidel V.
Ramos in 1992 (23.6%).

O The first post-Edsa president to
come near Garcia’s 1957 plurality was
Estrada, at 39.6% in 1998.

• to use the suffix “III” (there have been
no Juniors or “the Thirds” elected as
president previously).

• president to have a February birthday.

O Two presidents were born in January:
Roxas (Jan. 1), Corazon C. Aquino (Jan.
25); three in March: Laurel (Mar. 9),
Ramos (Mar. 18), Aguinaldo (Mar. 22);
two in April: Arroyo (Apr. 5), Estrada
(Apr. 19); two in August: Quezon (Aug.
19), Magsaysay (Aug. 31); three in
September: Osrmeha (Sep. 9), Marcos

248

(Sep. 11), Macapagal (Sep. 28); two in
November: Garcia (Nov. 4), Quirino
(Nov. 16).

The President of the Philippines uses license
plate No. 1.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the second:

• child of a former president to become
president in his own right.

O He succeeds the first presidential
child to become president, Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, who was the
daughter of Diosdado Macapagal.

• president from Tarlac, the first being his
mother, Corazon C. Aquino.

• president who does not drink. Previously,
Aguinaldo was the only non-drinker.

• president to be sworn in by a Filipino
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
(his mother, Corazon C. Aquino, was
the first), but the fourth president sworn
in by an Associate Justice of a Supreme
Court (Quezon in 1943 for the indefinite
extension of his term, and Osmena
who succeded into office in 1944, were
sworn in by U.S. Associate Justices Felix
Frankfurter and Robert H. Jackson,
respectively, in Washington, D.C.).

• president to have studied at the Ateneo de
Manila (the other being Joseph Ejercito
Estrada), but the first to have graduated
from the Ateneo de Manila University.

Two presidents only partially resided in
Malacanan Palace: Laurel, and Estrada (who
stayed in the Guest House).

Two presidents were elected by the legislature
and not in a national election: Aguinaldo and
Laurel. Two presidents were re-elected to
second terms: Quezon and Marcos.

Two presidents were brought to power by
People Power revolutions: Corazon Aquino
and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, our two
female presidents.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the third:

• president with no spouse: Quirino was
a widower, Corazon Aquino, a widow.
However, unlike Quirino and Corazon
C. Aquino, who had children, Benigno S.
Aquino III has none.

• youngest elected president (Magsaysay
remains the youngest ever nationally
elected to the presidency), and the fourth-
youngest president after Aguinaldo,
Magsaysay, and Marcos.

• to use his second given name, “Simeon,”
as his middle initial (as Quezon and
Laurel did).

• to engage in shooting as a sport (Quezon
and Marcos engaged in hunting). He
is also the third to be fond of billiards
(Garcia and Macapagal also played
billiards).

• president who only holds office in, but
not be a resident of, Malacanan Palace,
following Corazon C. Aquino and Fidel
V. Ramos.

• generation of Aquinos to have served in
the Philippine Senate: his grandfather
and father were also senators.

249

Three presidents (Quirino and Garcia upon
succession, Marcos in 1986) have taken their
oaths of office in Malacanan Palace.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the fourth:

• president to be sworn in by an Associate
Justice. Quezon, when his term was
extended in exile in 1943, renewed
his oath of office before Associate
Justice Felix Frankfurter. Osmena, who
succeeded to the presidency in exile,
was sworn in by Associate Justice Hugo
Jackson (thus, two presidents have
been sworn in by foreign justices, both
because they headed governments-in-
exile). Corazon C. Aquino was sworn in
by Associate Justice Claudio Teehankee.

O Eleven presidents were sworn in by
a chief justice: Quezon (1935, 1941),
Laurel, Roxas, Quirino, Magsaysay,
Garcia, Macapagal, Marcos, Ramos,
Estrada, Macapagal-Arroyo.

Four presidents were not inaugurated either
on December 30 or June 30: Aguinaldo
(January 23, 1899), Quezon (November
15, 1935 and November 15, 1943), Laurel
(October 14, 1943), Roxas (May 28, 1946).

Four vice-presidents who succeeded to the
presidency also took their oaths on dates
different from the traditional inaugural
date: Osmena (August 1, 1944); Quirino
(April 17, 1948), Garcia (March 18, 1957),
Macapagal-Arroyo (January 20, 2001).

Most number of times a president has taken
the oath of office: four, for Marcos (1965,

1969, the 1981 and 1986 “inaugurals”);
followed by three, for Quezon (1935 in
Manila, 1941 in Corregidor, and 1943 in
Washington, D.C., also before three different
individuals); Quirino (1948 in Malacanan,
and 1949 in Luneta Grandstand); Garcia
(1957, in Malacanan and in Luneta
Grandstand); Macapagal-Arroyo (2001 in
Quezon City, 2004 in Cebu).

Four presidents have had to flee Malacanan
Palace because of war or revolution: Quezon,
Laurel, Marcos, and Estrada.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the fifth:

• president to take his oath of office on
June 30, after Marcos, Ramos, Estrada,
and Macapagal-Arroyo.

O Starting with Quezon's second
inaugural in 1941 until Marcos’ second
inaugural in 1969 (with the exception
of the special election called in 1946)
presidents were inaugurated on Rizal
Day, December 30. Six presidents,
namely Quezon (1941), Quirino (1949),
Magsaysay, Garcia (1957), Macapagal
(1961), and Marcos (1965, 1969) had
inaugurals on December 30.

• public smoker to be president: Quezon,
Roxas, Garcia, Estrada were/are all
smokers.

• president of the Fifth Republic. The
present republic was established with
the ratification of the 1987 Constitution.
The previous republics are the First
(Malolos, 1899-1901); Second (The
Japanese Occupation, 1943-1945); the
Third (from independence in 1946 to

250

1972); the Fourth (the “New Republic”
proclaimed in 1981).

Benigno S. Aquino III comes from a family
of five siblings.

He was elected on the fifth month of 2010-
May 10,2010.

He received over 15 million votes; his
winning margin was over five million votes.

He was shot five times during the August
1987 failed coup attempt. Fragments of the
bullet are still lodged in his neck.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the sixth:

• president to have been elected to a single
six- year term (Quezon in 1935 [term
subsequently extended by constitutional
amendment], Aquino in 1986, Ramos in
1992, Estrada in 1998, and Macapagal-
Arroyo in 2004). He is only the second
President to serve an exact 6-year term
(only President Ramos has, so far, served
an exact 6 year term; President Quezon’s
original term was modified to permit
re-election for an additional two years;
President Corazon C. Aquino’s term was
extended by a few months to synchronize
her term with that of new officials elected
under the 1987 Constitution; President
Estrada’s term was shortened by EDSA
Dos; President Macapagal-Arroyo served
the remainder of her predecessor’s term
and an additional six years. Under the 1935
Constitution, only Diosdado Macapagal
served an exact four year term).

Benigno S. Aquino III is the seventh:

• president to be inaugurated at the

Quirino Grandstand. The other six
Presidents were: Quirino (1949),

Magsaysay (1953), Garcia (1957),
Macapagal (1961), Marcos (1965, etc.),
and Ramos (1992).

• to use a middle initial after Manuel L.
Quezon, Jose P. Laurel, Carlos P. Garcia,
Marcos, Corazon C. Aquino (who used
her maiden name as her middle initial),
and Fidel V. Ramos. The initials of
President Aquino are BSA III, following
the practice of his father and grandfather.
He uses his second given name as his
middle initial, the same practice followed
by Presidents Quezon and Laurel.

O Aguinaldo, Osmeha, Roxas, Quirino,
Magsaysay, and Macapagal did not
use middle initials at all. Joseph
Ejercito Estrada uses a special name
combining his real family name,
Ejercito, with his screen name. Mrs.
Arroyo prefers to use the hyphenated
Macapagal-Arroyo.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the eighth:

• President to receive an honorary degree
from Fordham University, the Jesuit
University of New York.

The shortest inaugural address at a regular

inaugural was Ramon Magsaysay ’s in 1953:

Eight minutes.

251

Benigno S. Aquino III is the ninth:

• president to have been proclaimed
president-elect by the legislature. The
first was Quezon, followed by Roxas,
Magsaysay, Macapagal, Marcos, Ramos,
Estrada, Macapagal-Arroyo (eighth if
you don’t count Macapagal-Arroyo’s
proclamation on the basis of the Quirino
and Garcia precedents).

O while Congress certified the election of
Quirino and Garcia, they had succeeded
into office previously, and were already
serving as president when elected to a
full term: thus, they were not referred
to as presidents-elect.

O Aguinaldo and Laurel were not elected
president in a national election, they
were made president by a vote of
the national assembly and thus never
president-elect.

O Corazon C. Aquino assumed the
presidency by means of the EDSA
People Power Revolution and was not
proclaimed by the Batasang Pambansa.

• president to have served as a congressman.

• president to swear on a Bible, and the
second to use the same Bible. Magsaysay
was the first to take his oath on a bible:
Garcia, Macapagal, Marcos, Aquino,
Ramos, Estrada, Macapagal-Arroyo
followed suit. Aguinaldo, Quezon, Laurel,
Osmena, Roxas, and Quirino (belonging
to generations closer to the revolutionary
era, did not take their oaths on a Bible).
Magsaysay and Marcos took their oath
on two bibles each in 1953 and 1965.

Benigno S. Aquino III was proclaimed
president-elect on June 9, 2010, exactly nine
months after his declaration of candidacy on
September 9, 2009.

Nine presidents lived in Malacanan
Palace: Quezon, Osmena, Roxas, Quirino,
Magsaysay, Garcia, Macapagal, Marcos,
Macapagal-Arroyo.

Benigno S. Aquino III is the tenth:

• senator to become a president.

• president to be inaugurated in Manila: the
nine who were previously inaugurated in
Manila were Quezon in 1935, Laurel in
1943, Roxas in 1946, Quirino in 1949,
Magsaysay in 1953, Garcia in 1957,
Macapagal in 1961, Marcos in 1965 etc.,
Ramos in 1992.

252

Constitution Day

MARK BLANCO

EVOLUTION OF THE PHILIPPINE
CONSTITUTION

The Philippines had a total of six
constitutions since the Proclamation
of Independence on June 12, 1898. In
1899, the Malolos Constitution, the first
Philippine Constitution — the first republican
constitution in Asia — was drafted and
adopted by the First Philippine Republic,
which lasted from 1899 to 190 Id 11
During the American Colonial Period, the
Philippines was governed by the laws of the
United States of America. Organic Acts were
passed by the United States Congress for the
administration of the Government of the
Philippine Islands. The first was the Philippine
Organic Act of 1902, which provided for a
Philippine Assembly composed of Filipino
citizensd 2] The second was the Philippine
Autonomy Act of 1916, which included
the first pledge of Philippine Independence.
These laws served as constitutions of the
Philippines from 1902 to 1935. [31

In 1934, the United States Congress passed
the Philippine Independence Act, which set the
parameters for the creation of a constitution
for the Philippines. The Act mandated the
Philippine Legislature to call for an election
of delegates to a Constitutional Convention
to draft a Constitution for the Philippines.

ymf

PHOTO The iconic photograph of 1899 Malolos
Congress: digitally colored, based on written accounts
and the restoration of the Barasoain Church for the
1998 Centennial. President Emilio Aguinaldo sits at
the center, as a gentleman reads a document to his
left. Photo from Visions of the Possible. Photo digitally
colorized by the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

The 1934 Constitutional Convention
finished its work on February 8, 1935. The
Constitution was submitted to the President
of the United States for certification on
March 25, 1935. It was in accordance with
the Philippine Independence Act of 1934.
The 1935 Constitution was ratified by the
Filipino people through a national plebiscite,
on May 14, 1935 and came into full force
and effect on November 15, 1935 with the
inauguration of the Commonwealth of the
Philippines. Among its provisions was that it

253

would remain the constitution of the Republic
of the Philippines once independence was
granted on July 4, 1946. [41

In 1940, the 1935 Constitution was
amended by the National Assembly of the
Philippines. The legislature was changed
from a unicameral assembly to a bicameral
congress. The amendment also changed the
term limit of the President of the Philippines
from six years with no reelection to four
years with a possibility of being reelected for
a second term! 51

During World War II, the Japanese-sponsored
government nullified the 1935 Constitution
and appointed Preparatory Committee on
Philippine Independence (PCPI) to replace
it. The 1943 Constitution was used by the
Second Republic with Jose P. Laurel as
President! 61

Upon the liberation of the Philippines in
1945, the 1935 Constitution came back
into effect. The Constitution remained
unaltered until 1947 when the Philippine
Congress called for its amendment through
Commonwealth Act No. 733! 71 On March
11, 1947 the Parity amendment gave United
States citizens equal rights with Filipino
citizens to develop natural resources in
the country and operate public utilities! 81
The Constitution, thereafter, remained the
same until it was replaced with the 1973
Constitution! 91

Before President Ferdinand E. Marcos
declared Martial Law, a Constitutional
Convention was already in the process of
deliberating on amending or revising the 1935
Constitution! 101 On November 29, 1972, the

ConCon completed its revised constitution
which President Marcos submitted for
ratification in early January of 1973J 111
Foreseeing that a direct ratification of the
constitution was bound to fail, President
Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 86,
s. 1972, 1121 creating citizens assemblies to
ratify the newly drafted constitution by
means of a viva voce vote in place of secret
ballots. President Marcos announced that it
had been ratified and in full force and effect
on January 17, 1973J 131 Although the 1973
Constitution had been “ratified” in this
manner, opposition against it continued.
Chief Justice Roberto V. Concepcion in his
dissenting opinion in the case of Javellana
v. Executive Secretary, exposed the fraud
that happened during the citizen’s assembly

PHOTO: Philippine Executive Commission Chairman
Jorge B. Vargas reads a message to the Kalibapi
in the presence of Lieutenant General Shigenori
Kuroda and Speaker Benigno S. Aquino, in the
old Senate Session Hall in the Legislative Building,
Manila. This photograph was most probably taken
on September 20, 1943, when the Kalibapi elected
the members of the National Assembly from
among its members. Photo digitally colorized by
the Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

254

ratification of the 1973 Constitution on
January, 10-15, 1973. [14] However, the final
decision of this case was that the ratification
of the 1973 Constitution was valid and was
in force. [15]

PHOTO: President Corazon C. Aquino addressing
the 1986 Constitutional Commission at its inaugural
session. Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum
and Library.

t if Ihr

Commission of 1956.

tun MM

When democracy was restored in 1986,
President Corazon C. Aquino issued
Proclamation No. 3, suspending certain
provisions of the 1973 Constitution and
promulgating in its stead a transitory
constitution. [1SI A month later, President
Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No.
9, s. 1986, which created a Constitutional
Commission tasked with writing a new
charter to replace the 1973 Constitution. The
commission finished its work at 12:28 a.m.
of October 16, 1986. National Plebiscite was
held on February 2, 1987, ratifying the new
constitution. On February 11, 1987, by virtue
of Proclamation No. 58, President Corazon
C. Aquino announced the official canvassing
of results and the ratification of the draft
constitution. The 1987 Constitution finally
came into full force and effect that same day
with the President, other civilian officials,
and members of the Armed Forces swearing
allegiance to the new charter. [171

COMMEMORATION OF CONSTITUTION DAY

For every constitutional change the Philippines
has experienced, a corresponding proclamation
was issued in order to celebrate the date that

each charter was put into full force and effect —
with the exception the 1943 Constitution.

Delegate ty\ANUEL fSOXA$, \f <HOWN flGNlNG THE CONSTITUTION
QF THE *HIUPP|N£f AT THE LAST 5E5FION OF THE CONVENT l 0<V HE.LO
ON FE&KUAKY 1S> |<93 5".

PHOTO: Delegate Manuel Roxas signs the
Constitution. He was the leading member of the
Committee on Style, also known as the Seven
Wise Men, who had a significant impact on the
final draft of the 1935 Constitution. Photo courtesy
of the President Manuel A. Roxas Foundation.

Photo digitally colorized by the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic
Planning Office.

President Emilio Aguinaldo issued the
first proclamation that celebrated the
effectiveness of a constitution in 1899 on
January 23, 1899. In the Proclamation,
President Aguinaldo ordered the release of
Spanish prisoners under the custody of the
Philippine revolutionary forces, to mark
the inauguration of the First Philippine
Republic. 1181 No subsequent proclamations
were issued because of the outbreak of the
Philippine-American War and the fall of the
First Philippine Republic in 1901.

When the United States Congress authorized
the creation of a constitution for the
Philippines in accordance with the Tydings-
Mcduffie Act of 1934, a Constitutional

255

Convention was established to draft a charter
for the Philippines and it finished its work
on February 8, 1935. On the inauguration
of the Commonwealth of the Philippines
on November 15, 1935, the new charter
came into full force and effect. 1191 A year
later, President Manuel L. Quezon issued
Proclamation No. 36, s. 1936, declaring the
8th of February of every year as Constitution
Day to commemorate the completion of the
1934 Constitutional Convention’s task. This
commemoration was observed throughout
the Commonwealth of the Philippines and
the Third Republic, up until the declaration
of Martial Law on September 23, 1972. 1201
(President Ferdinand E. Marcos reiterated
President Quezon’s original proclamation by
issuing Proclamation No. 10, s. 1966.) 1211

In 1973, after the declaration of Martial
Law, the 1935 Constitution was replaced
by a new charter, the 1973 Constitution. In
commemoration, President Marcos, repealed
President Quezon’s Proclamation No. 36, s.
1936, by virtue of Proclamation No. 1219,
s. 1974, which moved Constitution Day
from February 8 to January 17 of every
year. This proclamation commemorated the
day when President Marcos certified that
the new Constitution had been ratified.
Constitution day was commemorated 1221 until
the end of President Marcos’ term but was
overshadowed by the Proclamation making

September 21st of every year “Thanksgiving
day”, the date indicated on Presidential
Proclamation No. 1081, s. 1972: Martial
Law, however, was actually declared two
days later when President Marcos announced
it through nationwide television. 1231

When democracy was restored in 1986,
the 1973 Constitution was replaced by
first the Freedom Constitution, also known
as Proclamation No. 3, s. 1986, then our
current constitution, the 1987 Constitution.
1241 This constitution came into full force and
effect on February 11, 1987, after President
Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation
No. 58, s. 1987. The proclamation issued by
President Corazon C. Aquino included the
results of the plebiscite held on February 2,
1987. 1251

After the ratification of the 1987
Constitution, President Corazon C. Aquino
issued Proclamation No. 211 s, 1988, which
moved the commemoration of Constitution
Day from January 17 to February 2 of every
year — a proclamation still in effect to this
day. 1261

PHOTO: President Corazon C. Aquino receives the
1987 Constitution from Constitutional Commission
President Cecilia Munoz-Palma. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

256

ENDNOTES

[1J Ricardo S. Lazo, Philippine Governance
and the 1987 Constitution (Manila:
Rex Bookstore, 2009), 42.

[2] Jose M. Aruego, The Framing of the

Philippine Constitution (Manila: Loyal
Press, 1936), 3.

[3] Joaquin G. Bernas, The 1987

Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines: A Commentary (Quezon:
Rex Bookstore, 2003), xxxviii.

[4] Ibid., xxxix.

[5] “1935 Constitution Amended,” Official

Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed March 15, 2016,
http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/1935-
constitution-ammended/.

[6] “The 1943 Constitution,” The Official

Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed March 15, 2016,
http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/the-
1 943-constitution/.

[7] “Commonwealth Act No. 733,” The

Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1946/07/03/
commonwealth-act-no-733/.

[8] “Address of President Roxas on the

Parity Amendment to the Constitution
(Extracts),” The Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines, accessed
March 15, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1 947/03/1 0/address-of-president-
roxas-on-the-parity-amendment-to-the-
constitution-extracts/.

[9] Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the

Republic of the Philippines, xxxix.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] “Presidential Decree No. 86, s. 1972,”
The Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1972/12/01/
presidential-decree-no-73-s-1972/.

[13] David Wurfel, Filipino Politics:
Development and Decay (Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila Press), 116.

[14] Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines, xl.

[15] Ibid., 117.

[16] “Proclamation No. 3, s. 1986,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1986/03/25/
proclamation-no-3-s-l 986-2/.

[17] Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines, xlii.

[18] John R.M. Taylor, The Philippine
Insurrection Against the United States:
A Compilation of Documents with
Notes and Introduction (Pasay City:
Eugenio Lopez Foundation, 1971),
538-539.

[19] Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines, xxxix.

[20] “Proclamation No. 36, S. 1936,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1936/02/07/
proclamation-no-36-s-1936/.

[21] “Proclamation No. 10, s. 1966,” The
Official Gazette of the republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1966/02/07/
proclamation-no-10-s-1966/.

257

[22] “Proclamation No. 1219, s. 1974,”

The Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1974/01/09/
proclamation-no-1219-s-1974/.

[23] “Proclamation No. 1081, s. 1972,”
The Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1972/09/21/
proclamation-no- 1 081/.

[24] “Proclamation No. 3, s. 1986,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1986/03/25/
proclamation-no-3-s-l 986-2/.

[25] “Proclamation No. 58, s. 1987,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1987/02/ll/
proclamation-no-5 8-s-l 98 7/.

[26] “Proclamation No. 211, s. 1988,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1988/01/29/
proclamation-no-21 l-s-1988/.

258

The 1987 Constitution:

A Chronological Narrative

MARK BLANCO

June 2. 1986

Inaugural Session of the Constitution
Commission of 1986 at the Batasat
Pambansa Complex. Quezon City.
Oath-taking of Members.

After more than 20 years in power, President
Ferdinand E. Marcos bowed to domestic and
international pressure, and announced that
snap elections would be held in February
7, 1986. [1] Notwithstanding he had been
re-elected President only five years earlier —
when he ran against former Secretary of
Defense Alejo Santos [2] — the snap elections
was evidently an attempt by the ailing

autocrat to stabilize his regime by lending it
some sort of popular legitimacy.

The February 7, 1986 elections pit the
powerhouse administration tandem of
President Marcos and Mambabatas
Pambansa (MP) Arturo Tolentino of the
Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL) against the
United Democratic Opposition (UNIDO)

259

candidates: Corazon C. Aquino, widow of
martyred opposition Senator Benigno S.
Aquino Jr., and former Senator Salvador H.
Laurel. 131

Eight days after an election characterized
by voter intimidation and violence, the
Batasang Pambansa, dominated by Marcos
allies, proclaimed him re-elected based
on the official Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) results. In protest against the
massive electoral fraud, Minority Leader
and former House Speaker Jose B. Laurel Jr.
led an opposition walkout from the election
proceedings. 141

The fallout from the elections led to
immense international and internal pressure
on the Marcos regime. Political and
military defections rocked the government,
culminating in a failed coup attempt lead
by Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and
Armed Forces Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Fidel
V. Ramos. This was followed by a call to
mass action by civil society and the Catholic
hierarchy. 151

On February 25, the Philippines had the
unusual situation of having two Presidents.
President Marcos had taken his oath in
Maharlika Hall (later renamed Kalayaan
Hall), administered by Chief Justice Ramon
Aquino, with a throng of loyalists assembled
in the Palace grounds. Meanwhile, President
Corazon C. Aquino took her oath in Club
Filipino, administered by Associate Justice
Claudio Teehankee. 161 According to the 1973
Constitution, 171 the oath of the President was:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will

faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties

as President of the Philippines, preserve and
defend its Constitution, execute its laws, do
justice to every man and consecrate myself to
the service of the Nation. So help me God.”
[In case of affirmation, the last sentence is
omitted.]

However, President Corazon C. Aquino’s
oath avoided making any reference to
the constitution in force and revised the
Presidential oath as follows:

"I, Corazon C. Aquino, do solemnly swear that
I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my
duties as President of the Philippines, to serve
and defend its fundamental laws, execute
its just laws, do justice to every man, and
consecrate myself to the service of the nation.
So help me God.”

That night, the beleaguered Ferdinand
E. Marcos, his family, and cronies fled
Malacanan Palace aboard American
helicopters. 181 They would be taken to Clark
Air Base en route to exile in Hawaii. On the
same day, Mrs. Aquino issued Proclamation
No. 1, declaring she and Salvador Laurel
had taken over the powers of the Presidency
and the Vice Presidency, respectively. 191 Their
claim to power, as stated, was derived from
“the sovereign will of the Filipino people as
manifested in the Snap Elections of February
7, 1986.”

With Marcos gone, the newly established
government considered three options for
reconstituting the republic: 1101

First was to do away with all Marcosian
influence and return to the 1935 Constitution,
which was in use until the September 23,

260

1972 declaration of Martial Law. Members
of her government, such as Information
Minister Teodoro Locsin Jr., argued that the

1973 Constitution was never ratified. This
was, however, seen as impossible because
institutions, such as the bicameral legislature,
had been abolished by Marcos and a general
elections would have to be called. 1111

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum and
Library.

The second option was to retain the 1973
Constitution promulgated under Marcos,
which stipulated, among others, a unicameral
legislature that was elected in 1984 for a yet
unexpired five-year term. Put forward by
retired Supreme Court Associate Justice, and
MPs Cecilia Munoz-Palma, Marcelo Fernan,
and Homobono Adaza, they considered it
possible for President Corazon C. Aquino
to reform government with the current
constitution. All that the Batasan Pambansa,
which was now allied to President Corazon
C. Aquino, needed to do was nullify their
initial proclamation of Marcos and enact a
law granting President Aquino extraordinary
powers to reform government. President
Aquino, however, was wary of this option
as she did not want to derive legitimacy and
power from the very institutions that she
fought.

Lastly, and most radical, was a clean break,
a fresh start from the vestiges of a disgraced
dictatorship, as suggested by Fr. Joaquin
Bernas, S.J. and others. [12]

Subsequently, President Aquino issued
Proclamation No. 2, on March 2, 1986,
further reinstalling democratic institutions
by lifting the suspension of the writ of habeas
corpus. 1131

The decision was finally made as to what
constitution to adopt a month after the EDSA
People Power Revolution. On March 25,
1986, President Aquino issued Proclamation
No. 3 suspending certain provisions of the
1973 Constitution and promulgating in its
stead a transitory constitution to pave the
way for a new charter to replace the 1973
Constitution. This was to be drafted by an
appointed commission and ratified by the
people in a plebiscite. 1141

PHOTO: President of the Constitutional Commission
Cecilia Munoz-Palma. (Photo from Justice Palma
Foundation)

261

A Constitutional Commission, tasked
with drafting a new charter, was created
by virtue of Proclamation No. 9, issued on
April 23, 1986. The Executive Issuance
outlined guidelines for the election, rules,
and restrictions for the members of the
said commission. The Constitutional
Commission was first to be presided over by
Vice President Salvador H. Laurel until such
time as it elected its own leaders. On June 2,
1986, the commission started its work and
elected Cecilia Munoz-Palma as President,
former Senator Ambrosio B. Padilla as Vice
President, and Veteran Journalist Napoleon
G. Rama as veteran journalist. [15!

Five months after its first session, the
Commission finished its work. On October
12, 1986, Delegate Serafin V. C. Guingona
delivered his sponsorship speech for the
second reading of the entire draft of the
constitution. 1161

Thereafter, they moved to vote for the
passage of the draft in the Second Reading.
A total of 44 delegates voted for the draft
and two delegates voted against it with no
abstentions. Their session for October 12,
1986 ended at 7:53 p.m. 1171

Three days later, the final session of the
Constitutional Commission was held.
Toward the end of the session, Cecilia
Munoz-Palma delivered her closing remarks
as the President of the commission. 1181

The final session of the 1986 Constitutional
Commission ended at 12:28 a.m. of October
16, 1986. The body then motioned for
the approved draft to be submitted to the
President for her consideration and proper

action of ratification. Aside from the draft, the
commission also submitted to the President a
suggested date for the referendum. 1191

A national plebiscite was held three months
after the submission of the draft Constitution
to the President. On February 2, 1987, the
nation was asked to answer the question
“Do you vote for the ratification of the
proposed Constitution of the Republic of
the Philippines with the Ordinance appended
thereto?” in order to put the Constitution
into effect. After the national vote, a board
of canvassers was convened on February 4,
1987 and finished its work three days after.
The results showed 76.30% (16,622,111
voters) of the population voted for the
ratification of the Constitution; 22.74%
(4,953,375 voters) voted against it; and
0.96% (209,780 voters) abstained. 1201

President Aquino, soon after the end of
canvassing, issued Proclamation No. 58,
which announced the official canvassing
of results and the ratification of the draft
constitution. The 1987 Constitution finally
came into full force and effect on February
11, 1987 with the President, other civilian
officials, and members of the Armed Forces
swearing allegiance to the new charter. 1211

262

ENDNOTES

[1J Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office (PCDSPO), Philippine Electoral
Almanac, rev. and exp. ed. (Manila:
PCDSPO, 2015), 130.

[2] Ibid., 127.

[3] Ibid., 130.

[4] Ibid., 130.

[5] Alfred W. McCoy, Closer than Brothers:

Manhood at the Philippine Military
Academy (London and New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press, 1999), 231.

[6] “February 25 Tuesday,” Chronology of

the Revolution, accessed March 15,
2016, http://edsarevolution.com/day4.
htm.

[7] “The 1973 Constitution of the Republic

of the Philippines,” The Official
Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed March 15, 2016,
http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/1973-
constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-
philippines-2/.

[8] “February 26 Wednesday,” Chronology

of the Revolution, accessed March 15,
2016, http://edsarevolution.com/flight.
htm.

[9] “Proclamation No. 1, s. 1986,” The

Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1986/02/25/
proclamation-no-l-s-1986/.

[10J Joaquin G. Bernas, The 1987

Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines: A Commentary (Quezon
City: Rex Bookstore, 2003), xlii.

[11] The Constitutional Commission of
1986, Record of the Constitutional
Commission: Proceedings and
Debates Volume 1 /Quezon City: The
Constitutional Commission of 1986),
24-33.

[12] Ibid.

[13] “Proclamation No. 2, s. 1986,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1986/03/02/
proclamation-no-2-s-1986/.

[14] “Proclamation No. 3, s. 1986,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1986/03/25/
proclamation-no-3-s-l 986-2/.

[15] The Constitutional Commission of
1986, Record of the Constitutional
Commission: Proceedings and
Debates Volume 1 (Quezon City: The
Constitutional Commission of 1986),
1-13.

[16] The Constitutional Commission of
1986, Record of the Constitutional
Commission: Proceedings and
Debates Volume 5 (Quezon City: The
Constitutional Commission of 1986),
907-910.

[17] Ibid., 945-946.

[18] Ibid., 1000-1015.

[19] Ibid.

[20] PCDSPO, Philippine Electoral
Almanac, 137.

[21] “Proclamation No. 58, s. 1987,” The
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, accessed March 15,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1987/02/ll/
proclamation-no-58-s-l 98 7/.

263

History of the
Malaeanam Palace

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

The official residence of the President of
the Philippines is the Malacanan Palace.
Situated in the old Manila district of San
Miguel, over the 175 years that government
has owned the place, the buildings have
been remodeled, expanded, demolished,
and rebuilt, and the adjoining lands were
bought. Most recently, in 1978 to 1979, the
Palace itself was drastically remodeled and
extensively rebuilt by then First Lady Imelda
Romualdez Marcos.

SPANISH COLONIAL ERA

The first recorded owner of the property
was Luis Rocha, a Spaniard in the Galleon
trade. The Rocha property was built of
stone, described as being a relatively modest
country house (although modern day
Rochas say it was not small and in fact had
a ballroom) with a bath house on the river
and gardens, all enclosed by a stone fence.
The latter was probably a nipa-roofed and
bamboo-enclosed structure built on the
water, where away from the gaze of passing
boats, the Rochas and their guests could
enjoy the rushing water while clinging to a
rope-a favorite pastime of the era. It was

one among many weekend homes of the elite,
located in San Miguel, Paco, and Sta. Ana
along the Pasig river and its tributaries, easily
accessible from Intramuros and Binondo by
boat, by carriage, or on horseback. 111 The still
standing “Carriedo House” within the Sta.
Mesa campus of the Polytechnic University
of the Philippines may have been one of these
weekend homes.

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum and
Library.

Luis Rocha sold the property in 1802 to
Colonel Jose Miguel Fomento of the Spanish
Army. Fomento’s testamentary executors in
turn sold it to the government upon his death
in 1825. [2]

264

The Spanish Governors General had lived
grandly in Intramuros since the 17th century
in the Palacio del Gobernador on the Plaza
Mayor (now Plaza Roma). The “Posesion de
Malacanang” as it was called, was a country
home and temporary residence of outgoing
Governors General awaiting the next ship to
Spain. 131

The great earthquake of June 3, 1863
felled the Palacio in Intramuros. Governor
General Rafael de Echague y Bermingham
had to move to Malacanan Palace. 141 Finding
the place too small, a wooden two-storey
building was added at the back of the original
structure; smaller buildings for aides, guards,
and porters; as well as stables, carriage sheds,
and a boat landing for river-borne visitors.

The newly closed Colegio de Sta. Potenciana
was remodelled into the Palacio Provisional
de Sta. Potenciana, located at the site where
now stands the Philippine National Red
Cross and possibly the National Commission
for Culture and the Arts Buildings on General
Luna Street. With Sta. Potenciana ready, the
Governor General moved back to Intramuros
in 1865. 151 Meanwhile, repairs continued at
Malacanan Palace. Work must have been
just completed when another earthquake

struck, badly damaging both Sta. Potenciana
and Malacanan Palace. 161 The Governor
General moved to an office building on Calle
Cabildo in Intramuros.

Malacanan Palace was once again repaired
and improved. Its posts were strengthened,
roof tiles replaced with corrugated iron
sheets, balconies repaired, and both exterior
and interior beautified. As luck would
have it, no sooner were these completed
when fresh calamities struck: a typhoon in
October 1872, an earthquake in December
1872, a fire in February 1873, another fire in
1873 after repairs were completed, and a bad
storm in May 1873. After that, rebuilding
resumed in earnest, with new wings, azoteas,
rooms, and galleries, over the next four years
(1875-1879). 171

By the time the Americans took over in 1898,
Malacanan Palace was a rambling Spanish
colonial period complex of buildings, built
of wood, with sliding capiz windows, patios,
and azoteas. 181

UNDER AMERICAN RULE

The American Governors General abandoned
the plan to reconstruct the old Palacio at

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum and
Library.

265

Intramuros. Instead, they continued to
improve and enlarge Malacanan Palace,
buying up more land, reclaiming more of
the Pasig River, raising the ground level (to
keep above flood waters), changing wood
to concrete, and beautifying the interiors
with hardwood panelling and magnificent
chandeliers. 191

In 1920, the Executive Building was
constructed by Governor General Francis
Burton Harrison. Until then, the Governor
General had to commute daily to his office
at the Ayuntamiento Building. 1101 Governor
General Leonard Wood was the last chief
executive to hold office in Intramuros and the
first in Malacanan Palace. Governor General
Dwight Davis (1929-1932) notably rebuilt
the Malacanan Palace itself extensively. 1111

have been the State Dining Room and its
service area, was damaged by shelling, but
the rest was unscathed.

MALACANAN PALACE DURING THE
COMMONWEALTH

Beginning 1935, when Manuel L. Quezon
moved to Malacanan Palace as the President
of the Commonwealth, Palace improvements
were continued, including the construction
of the Social Hall (now Heroes Hall on the
ground floor, intended for dining, dancing,
and non-official social affairs), State Dinning
Room, and the famous Pasig River facade.
It was then First Lady Dona Aurora Aragon
Quezon who saw to the construction of a
Palace chapel, which is at the left of the main
entrance, on time for the 33rd International
Eucharistic Congress in 1937. 1121

Malacanan Palace survived the Second
World War, the only survivor among the
major government buildings of Manila. The
southwest side of the Palace, which would

Malacanan Palace continued to be the jewel
of the still fashionable district of San Miguel,
spared by the war, unlike Ermita, Malate, and
Paco across the river which were devastated. 1131

PALACE RENOVATIONS

In 1972, the Executive Building was cleared
of employees. Many transferred to the
recently enlarged Administration Building
(now called Mabini Hall). J.P. Laurel Street
(formerly Aviles Street) was closed to traffic
and the Pasig River dredged. The entire
second floor of the Executive Building was
converted into the large Maharlika Hall, used
for social functions and official gatherings. 1141

The former servants’ quarters at the west end
of the Palace grounds, abutting the old San
Miguel Brewery which has since transferred
elsewhere, was remodeled in 1975 into

266

the Premier Guest House, in time for the
International Monetary Fund-World Bank
Boards of Governors meeting. 1151 The nearby
Arlegui Guest House was built at the same
time.

In 1978-1979, the Palace was expanded, its
facades on all four sides moved forward. The
Presidential quarters were enlarged on the
J.P. Laurel front, eliminating the small garden
and driveway leading to the private entrance.
A new dining room and expanded guest
suites were built on the main entrance front.
On the riverside, a large Ceremonial Hall was
built in place of the azoteas, veranda, and
pavilion. [1SI A larger Presidential bedroom
was constructed on the remaining side, with
a disco above, at roof level. The layout of the
old rooms was retained, although the rooms
themselves were enlarged and new bedroom
suites inserted in what had been part of the
garden.

The old Palace was gutted almost entirely,
not only to meet the needs of the Presidential
family, but also because the buildings had
been weakened by patch up renovation and
repair jobs for a century.

The new Palace was made of poured
concrete, concrete slabs, steel girders, and
trusses, all concealed by elegant hardwood
floors, panels and ceilings. It was fully bullet-
proofed and air-conditioned and had an
independent power supply. Reconstruction
was overseen by Architect Jorge Ramos and
closely supervised by Mrs. Marcos. It was
inaugurated on May 1, 1979, the Marcos
silver wedding anniversary. 1171

During a fire in 1982 many irreplaceable
mementos in a small museum located at
the ground floor were lost. Air purification
equipment was installed in 1983. In both
instances, the First Family lived in the
Premiere Guest House.

MODERN-DAY MALACANAN PALACE

The Marcos family bid Malacanan Palace
goodbye in the evening of February 25,
1986, a few hours after President Ferdinand
E. Marcos took his oath for a six-year term
before Chief Justice Ramon Aquino. Fulfilling
a campaign promise, President Corazon C.
Aquino decided to live in what had been
the Arlegui Guest House and held office in
the Premier Guest House. Her successor,
President Fidel V. Ramos, also decided to live
in the Arlegui Guest House but held office
in the Palace. [1S1 President Joseph Ejercito
Estrada remodelled the Premier Guest House
into a combination residence and office. In
January 2001, President Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo returned to the Palace and made it
both her residence and office. 1191 President
Benigno S. Aquino III, in 2010, chose not to
reside in the Palace but in Bahay Pangarap,
located within Malacanang Park, and holds
office in Bonifacio Hall of Malacanan Palace.

267

ENDNOTES

[1J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malcahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 34-35.

[2] Ibid., 36.

[3] Ibid., 44.

[4] Ibid., 69.

[5] Ibid., 71.

[6] Ibid., 73.

[7] Nicanor G. Tiongson, ed., CCP

Encyclopedia of Philippine Art Volume
III: Philippine Architecture (Manila:
Cultural Center of the Philippines,
1994), 246.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid., 247; Quezon et ah, Malacahan

Palace, 137-142.

[10] Quezon et ah, Malacahan Palace, 143.

[11] Ibid., 151.

[12] Ibid., 189-194.

[13] Ibid., 215.

[14] Ibid., 254-255.

[15] Ibid., 268.

[16] Ibid., 273.

[17] Ibid., 278-280.

[18] Ibid., 295-297.

[19] Ibid., 297-300.

268

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

MAGSAYSAY DINING ROOM

Originally the State Dining Room during
the Spanish era, this became the family
living and dining room at the time of the
Commonwealth. A special set of furniture,
featuring a unique dining table and portraits
of First Ladies, were commissioned for this
room. During his presidency, this room was
favored by President Ramon Magsaysay as
a location for his Cabinet meetings. 111 The
room was named after him in August 31,
2003 by virtue of Proclamation No. 451.

GARCIA ROOM

The Garcia Room was formerly a much
smaller room, which led from the old Family
Dining Room to the private apartments of
the First Family in the North Wing. Enlarged
and enclosed in 1979, it was named after

President Carlos P. Garcia in December 17,
2002 by virtue of Proclamation No. 518 in
remembrance of the President who used it as
a Game Room during his term. 121

LAUREL ROOM

During the years of the Japanese occupation,
then President Jose P. Laurel held office in
Malacanan Palace while choosing to stay
in his Paco residence. President Laurel used
President Manuel L. Quezon’s bedroom when
he briefly stayed in the Palace prior to being
evacuated to Baguio. 131 Presidents Elpidio
Quirino and Ramon Magsaysay both also
used this room as their bedrooms throughout
their Presidential stints. United States
President Dwight D. Eisenhower, resided in
this bedroom while visiting the Philippines
in 1960. President Ferdinand E. Marcos,
converted this room into his private office. 141

269

By virtue of Proclamation No. 339 on March
10, 2003, the room became known as the
Laurel Room to recognize the President
Laurel’s service to the nation.

MARCOS ROOM

In 1965, President Ferdinand E. Marcos and
Mrs. Imelda Marcos had new bedrooms
constructed for themselves. [s) In 1978-
1979, finding Malacanan Palace decayed by
time and in an advanced state of structural
disrepair, the reconstruction of the Palace
was ordered. Rebuilt under the supervision
of Architect Jorge Ramos, Malacanan Palace
was rebuilt in time to be re-inaugurated for
the silver wedding anniversary of President
and Mrs. Marcos on May 1, 1979. 161 The
renovations included the greatly enlarged
bedrooms for President Marcos and a
separate windowless suite for Mrs. Marcos. 171

President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued
Proclamation No. 464 on September 1 1, 2003
naming this room after President Marcos,
citing its historic value and connection to
President Marcos.

MACAPAGAL ROOM

The Macapagal Room is located in the
North Wing of Malacanan Palace, which was
constructed in 1937 to provide additional
bedrooms for the First Family. It was first
used by Mrs. Aurora A. Quezon, then it
was later occupied by President and Mrs.
Sergio Osmena, President and Mrs. Manuel
Roxas, President Elpidio Quirino during his
first term, and President and Mrs. Carlos P.
Garcia. 181 On January 16, 1962, President
and Mrs. Diosdado Macapagal moved into

this room, having spent the first few weeks of
his administration commuting morning and
afternoon between their private residence at
108 Laura Street, San Juan and the Executive
Office in Malacanan Palace.

However, during the reconstruction of the
Palace from 1978-1979, this room was
enlarged and greatly changed, although the
location of this room conforms roughly to
the old bedroom.

In recognition of President Macapagal’s
service to the nation, this room was named the
Macapagal Room by virtue of Proclamation
No. 478, signed on September 28, 2003.

ENDNOTES

[1J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malcahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 165-166.

[2] Ibid., 168-169.

[3] Ibid., 208-209.

[4] Ibid., 253.

[5] Ibid., 178.

[6] Ibid., 271.

[7] Ibid., 176.

[8] Ibid., 250 and 253.

270

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

RIZAL CEREMONIAL HALL

This room, the largest in the Palace, is used
for large dinners and large assemblies —
notably the mass oath takings of public
officials and the annual Independence Day
Vin d’Honneur. Orchestras sometimes play
from the minstrels’ galleries at the two ends
of the hall.

Three large wood and glass chandeliers
illuminate the hall. Carved and installed in
1979 by the famous Juan Flores of Beds,
Pampanga, the chandeliers are masterpieces
of Philippine artistry in wood.

The Rizal Ceremonial Hall used to be much
smaller, built in 1936 where there used to be
a smaller courtyard dating back to Spanish
times. The Rizal Ceremonial Hall was in
effect merely an extension of the Reception
Hall. It had a coved ceiling similar to those
to those of old Philippine homes, and glass
doors opening to verandas on three sides
overlooking the Pasig River and Malacanang
Park. The room at the time boasted the
largest Czechoslovakian chandelier in the
Palace, purchased in 1937 (since 1979 this

has been in Bonifacio Hall). Many an al
fresco party was held here, with round tables
set on the azoteas and veranda for dinner
and the Ceremonial Hall, doors thrown
open, cleared for dancing. This is the hall
where Presidents also lie-in-state during
state funerals. The azoteas, verandas, and
the intimate pavilion in the middle were
combined in 1979 into the present enormous
hall. 111

On June 19, 2003, Proclamation No. 407
named this room the Rizal Ceremonial hall
in tribute to the martyrdom of Dr. Jose
Rizal, whose death sentence was passed in
Malacanan Palace.

RECEPTION HALL

This room was the largest of the Palace
before the 1979 renovation. It was created by
Governor General Francis Burton Harrison,
who demolished bedrooms to create a
spacious area. It was embellished with a
vaulted ceiling and three Czechoslovakian
chandeliers by President Manuel L. Quezon
and totally rebuilt in 1979. Old photographs
show presidents receiving guests close to

271

the top of the Grand Staircase at the New
Year’s Day “at home” and other affairs. An
elaborate ceiling was installed in the 1930s,
carved by noted sculptor Isabelo Tampingco,
who depicted vases of flowers against a lattice
background. The Tampingco woodwork,
supported by concrete neoclassical pillars,
was curved and in some eyes gave the room
a coffin shaped 21 In the 1979 renovation, the
Tampingcos were replaced with two facing
balconies and the pillars were removed. The
balconies each have seven chandeliers, seven
being the lucky number of the Marcoses.

Easily, the most outstanding feature of
the Reception Hall are the three large
Czechoslovakian chandeliers bought in
1937. These have always been treasured
and during the Second World War, were
carefully disassembled prism by prism and
hidden for safekeeping. They were taken
out and reassembled after the war. Beneath
the chandeliers is a massive table made of
the finest Philippine hardwoods, a gift to
President Quezon from convicts in gratitude
for their presidential pardons. The table was
a fixture of the Reception Hall from the
Quezon to Marcos administrations, then it
became the dining table for the presidential
residence used by Presidents Aquino and
Ramos. It was restored to its traditional place
in 2002 and again in 2011. The Reception
Hall also features the official portraits of the
Presidents of the Philippines. 131

AGUINALDO STATE DINING ROOM

This room was the ballroom of the Palace
from Spanish times until the Commonwealth.
President Quezon turned it into the State
Dining Room in 1935.

In the past, this was where presidents dined
with state guests and official visitors. A long
adjustable table could accommodate up to
about fifty guests. The President would sit
at the center of the table and the First Lady
across from him. The chandeliers, which were
transferred by President Quezon from the
Ayuntamiento de Manila, are Spanish, as are
the gilded mirrors that have been here since
1877. The room was widened and a mirrored
ceiling installed in 1979. President Arroyo
had some of the mirrors replaced with the
Amorsolo paintings from the Ramos Study
Conference Room, and the mirrors attached
to the ceiling removed.

Beyond is a smaller room, just as long, but
narrower than the dining room. Intended for
cabinet meetings and film showings, the room
proved rather small and was rarely used as
such. The room, called the Viewing Room,
was more frequently used to hold buffets for
people meeting in the State Dining Room.
Another 1979 innovation, this occupies
what was a veranda overlooking the Palace
driveway and garden.

It was named the Aguinaldo State Dining
Room in 2003 in honor of President Emilio
Aguinaldo, who was confined in this room
by the Americans following his capture in
Palanan, Isabela in 1901. 141

PRESIDENTIAL STUDY

Formerly called the Rizal Room, the
Presidential Study was created in 1935 from
what used to be a bedroom dating back to
Spanish times. Francis Burton Harrison Jr.
was born here during his father’s term as
Governor General. Since Governor General

272

Frank Murphy brought with him the
Governor General’s desk made for William
Howard Taft, President Manuel L. Quezon
installed a new desk and chairs used by all
the Philippine presidents until President
Ferdinand E. Marcos replaced them in 1979.

Subsequently, the old presidential desk and
chairs were kept in President Marcos’ private
office until they were put away in storage
during the Aquino administration. Late in
his term, President Marcos restored the desk
and chairs to the presidential study but they
were again removed by President Estrada
and used instead in the First Lady’s office in
the New Executive Building. The presidential
desk and chairs were restored once more to
their traditional use and place by President
Arroyo. The chandelier in this room dates
to the Commonwealth as does the general
design of the room, which was expanded and
rebuilt in 1979.

Presidents Quezon, Laurel, Osmena, Roxas,
Quirino, Magsaysay, and Garcia used this
office primarily in the afternoon and in the
evening, for more confidential work, or to
greet visitors and address the nation on radio.
Presidents Macapagal and Marcos gradually
abandoned the use of the Presidential Office
in the Executive Building and began using
the Presidential Study exclusively.

Behind the Presidential Study is a small
conference room called the Study Conference
Room. President Marcos used this as an
extension of his office, for confidential
meetings. It continued to be used as office
space until it was refurbished during the
Estrada administration. 151

MUSIC ROOM

Originally a bedroom during the Spanish
and American colonial periods, the usage of
this room changed over the years, and the
room was later remodelled into a library for
Mrs. Aurora A. Quezon in 1936. During the
administration of President Elpidio Quirino,
the bookshelves were removed turning it into
a Music Room, with sculptures by Guillermo
Tolentino adorning the room. A Juan Luna
masterpiece, “Una Bulaquena,” used to hang
above the grand piano, flanked by “The
Cellist” by Miguel Zaragosa.

Used as a reception and sitting room by First
Ladies, Mrs. Imelda Marcos decorated the
room in mint green. She would sit on the
antique French sofa while her visitors sat on
armchairs. On rare occasions, small concerts
were held here, featuring famous Filipino
and foreign musicians. President Corazon C.
Aquino used this room for receiving officials
and accepting credentials from ambassadors.
During the Estrada administration, the room
was refurbished with more comfortable
sofas and easy chairs, but maintained the
same color schemed 61

273

HEROES HALL

Originally named the Social Hall, it was
constructed by President Manuel L. Quezon
and was intended for informal gatherings,
until it was renamed Heroes Hall by President
Diosdado Macapagal and decorated with
bronze busts of heroes by the renowned
Filipino sculptor Guillermo Tolentino. The
Heroes Hall, as large as the Rizal Ceremonial
Hall directly above, received a mirrored
ceiling in 1979 and for the rest of the Marcos
era was used not only for meetings and
informal gatherings, but also for state dinners
in honor of visiting Heads of State. Among
the distinguished visitors entertained in this
Hall by the Marcoses were the President of
Mexico, the Prime Minister of Thailand, and
Princess Margaret of the United Kingdom.

It was from this room that Presidents Marcos
and Estrada departed the palace for the last
time in 1986 and 2001.

In 1998, the National Centennial

Commission installed three large paintings
specially commissioned for the hall. The one
in the vestibule is by Carlos Valino, while the
two others are by a group of artists headed
by Karen Flores and Elmer Borlongan. The
murals depict the panorama of Philippine
history from the pre-Hispanic era to 1998.
These are in addition to the portraits
of various heroes painted by Florentino
Macabuhay from 1940-1960 and displayed
in the corridor leading to the Heroes Halid 71

PRESIDENT’S HALL

This was formerly the living and recreation
room of the Private Quarters. Added in the
1978-1979 renovations, it has also been
used as a Private Dining room in previous
administrations. Under President Benigno
S. Aquino III, it has become known as the
President’s Hall where official gatherings,
meetings, oath takings, and entertaining of
state visitors take place.

ENDNOTES

[1] Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,

and Jeremy Barns, Malcahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 110-111.

[2] Ibid., 193.

[3] Ibid., 106-107.

[4] Ibid., 108-109.

[5] Ibid., 114-115.

[6] Ibid., 112-113.

[7] Ibid., 116-117.

274

.Kalayaan Hall

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

Kalayaan Hall is the oldest part of the Palace
and combines the histories of the American
colonial period, the Commonwealth, and
the Second and Third Republics. Built in the
Renaissance-revivalist style of architecture,
it stands on the grounds of a Spanish-era
picadero pavilion and has survived through
the Second World War into the 21st century,
making it one of the most intact pre-war
public buildings in the country. The facade
once sparkled with Romblon marble
embedded in the concrete, but since the
1960s, coats of white paint have obscured
it. The hall’s imposing appearance can be
attributed to its precast ornamentation, high
ceilings for air circulation in the tropical
climate, and wrought iron porte-cochere and
balconies. This building has served as the
center of executive power for generations. 111

The main hall at the second floor of Kalayaan
Hall was once the location of the guest
bedrooms during the American colonial
period before it housed the executive offices
during the Commonwealth. 121 In 1968, the
building was renovated to form the much
larger Maharlika Hall, becoming the site for
State Dinners and Citizens’ Assemblies during
the Marcos administration. On February 25,
1986, President Marcos took his last oath of
office and gave his farewell speech from the

hall’s front west balcony. 131 It was subsequently
used as the Office of the Press Secretary until
2002, when it was transformed into the
main gallery of the Presidential Museum and
Library, with parts of the old State Dining
table in the center, as well as the Gallery of
Presidents, which is composed of objects and
memorabilia — including clothing, personal
effects, gifts, publications and documents —
pertaining to the fifteen persons who have
held the Presidency.

STATE ROOMS

QUEZON EXECUTIVE OFFICE

The Quezon Executive Office was constructed
from 1937-1939 as the new Executive
Office for Presidents of the Philippines
during the administration of Manuel L.
Quezon, who was the first to use it. It was
also one of the first airconditioned offices in
the Philippines; centralized airconditioning
was installed under the supervision of Mr.
A.D. Williams in 1937. 141 This room was
then used for completing paper work and
other office duties of the President of the
Philippines, while the Presidential Study in
Malacanan Palace itself was used for more
confidential meetings and matters.

Presidents Laurel, Osmena, Roxas, Quirino,

275

and Magsaysay also used this room as their
executive office during their presidencies.
President Garcia began using the Presidential
Study almost exclusively for official
business during his term, a practice followed
by Presidents Macapagal and Marcos.
However, President Marcos had this room
refurbished in 1972 and occasionally used it
for official business, until this room became
the office of General Fabian Ver! 51 During
the term of President Corazon Aquino this
room was at first used by the Press Secretary
and eventually fell into disuse, until it was
restored in 2003.

QUIRINO COUNCIL OF STATE ROOM

The Quirino Council State Room was
constructed in 1937-1939. It was in this
room that the newly-reconstituted Council
of State during the administration of
President Manuel L. Quezon met. A practice
kept until the Macapagal Administration. It
was also here that the National Economic
Council, today’s National Economic and
Development Authority, met. President
Quezon preferred to have his cabinet meetings
in this room, as did Presidents Quirino,
Garcia, and Macapagal. Presidents Roxas,
Quirino, Magsaysay, Garcia, Macapagal,
and Marcos also had important meetings
in this room and it was here that officials
generally took their oaths of office before the
President of the Philippines until the Marcos
administration. 161 From the administration
of President Roxas until President Garcia,
all treaties and conventions entered into by
the Republic of the Philippine and foreign
governments were also signed in this room.

Two presidents of the Philippines have taken
their oath of office in this room. On April 17,

1948, after the sudden demise of President
Roxas, Elpidio Quirino took his oath of office
as President of the Philippines in this room.
Carlos P. Garcia took his oath of office as
President in this room on March 18, 1957,
after the tragic death of President Magsaysay! 71

During the administration of President
Marcos, cabinet meetings were transferred to
the State Dining Room (now the Aguinaldo
State Dining Room) in Malacanan Palace,
and this room was turned into part of a
television studio in 1 98 1 . [8] It was restored
in 2003 and named after President Elpidio
Quirino by virtue of Proclamation No. 501
on November 16, 2003.

ROXAS CABINET ROOM

The Roxas Cabinet Room was part of
the 1937-1939 additions to the Executive
Building. It was originally intended as the
Cabinet Room, though used sparingly as
such by President Manuel L. Quezon. It
was President Manuel Roxas who actively
used this room as the room for meetings of
his cabinet, a practice continued until the
early years of the Quirino administration.
This room was used variously as a meeting
and conference room and an office until
it became the control room of a television
studio in 1981! 91 On March 31, 2003,
Proclamation No. 348 named this room the
Roxas Cabinet Room. It was also restored
to its former appearance in the same year.

OSMENA ROOM

The Osmena Room was used from 1920-1939
as the Cabinet Room under the American
Governors General and during the early years
of the Commonwealth of the Philippines.

276

During his outstanding career, Sergio
Osmena attended meetings in this room, first
as a member of the Council of State in his
capacity as Speaker of the House, and then
Senate President pro tempore. 1101 During
the administration of President Manuel L.
Quezon, then Vice President Osmena was
given the premier portfolio in the cabinet
as Secretary of Public Instruction, and
attended cabinet meetings here during that
time. He also held office in this building
as Vice President from 1935-1944. After
the restoration of the Commonwealth
government in 1945, President Osmena held
office in this building as well.

Proclamation No. 463, dated September
9, 2003, named this room after former
President Osmena. It was used by various
offices before it was fully restored in 2007.

OLD VICE PRESIDENT’S OFFICE

Completed in 1939, the rooms in this eastern
part of the second floor originally comprised
the offices of the Vice President, and were
used as such until the imposition of Martial
Law in 1972. The Southwest Gallery exhibits
items evoking the life and administration
of President Corazon C. Aquino, while the
Northeast Gallery features portraits of the
Vice Presidents done by various artists, as
well as items about President Benigno S.
Aquino III and his father, former Senator
Benigno S. Aquino Jr.

PRESIDENTIAL BROADCAST STUDIO

Between 1935 and 1939 during the pre-
war years of the Commonwealth of the
Philippines under President Manuel L.
Quezon, future United States President

Dwight D. Eisenhower held office as
assistant military adviser to the Philippine
government here within the East Room of the
Old Executive Building. On June 15, 1960,
during his State Visit to the Philippines — the
first visit of an American president to the
country — President Eisenhower returned to
this room with President Carlos P. Garcia
shared his memories of the years spent here
in his old office.

During the presidency of Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo this room was made into the
Presidential Broadcast Studio. It gave people
the chance to see their president at work. The
Presidential Broadcast Studio commenced
operations on January 8, 2008.

HISTORIC ROOMS

OLD GOVERNOR GENERAL’S OFFICE

This served as the Governor General’s office
from Leonard Wood to Frank Murphy.
It was the Executive Secretary’s office
from 1935-1936. By this time, American
authority was long established at the Palace,
starting with Military Governors Wesley
Merrit (1898), Elwell S. Otis (1898-1900),
and Arthur MacArthur (1900-1901). The
era of American rule (1898-1935) is the
focus of the old Governor General’s Office
gallery, and includes the subsequent civil
governments that was inaugurated on July
4, 1901 under William Howard Taft (1901-
1902). All the military and civil governors
lived at the Palace; after Taft came Luke
E. Wright (1904-1906). Henry Clay Ide
(1906), James F. Smith (1906-1909),
William Cameron Forbes (1909-1913),
Francis Burton Harrison (1913-1921),
Leonard Wood (1921-1928), Henry Stimson
(1928-1929), Dwight F. Davis (1929-1932)

277

Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. (1932-1933), and
Frank Murphy (1933-1935). Harrison
was responsible for the construction of the
Executive Building, and Malacanan Palace
from 1921 onward hosted the offices of the
executive as well as the residences of the
Governor General. [11!

OLD VICE GOVERNOR GENERAL’S OFFICE

This was the Vice Governor General’s
office from 1920-1935 and, thereafter, the
Deputy Executive Secretary’s office from
1935 to the Macapagal Administration.
An art competition, participated in by the
children of the employees of the Office of
the President, was held in the late 1970s
with the Malacanang compound — its
buildings and prominent aspects — as the
subject. Displayed here in what used to be
the Vice Governor General’s Office from
1920-1935 are some of the entries executed
in various media, some showing features of
the compound which no longer exist or are
awaiting restoration.

OLD EXECUTIVE SECRETARY’S OFFICE

The Old Executive Secretary’s Office was
used by President Manuel L. Quezon as
his office from 1935-1936. It then became
the office of Secretary Jorge B. Vargas,
the first Executive Secretary. It served
as the Executive Secretary’s office until
the Macapagal Administration. The Old
Executive Secretary’s Office Gallery contains
an exhibit on the era of Reform, Revolution,
and the First Philippine Republic (c.
1860s-1901), during which many heroes
of the Philippines had fateful encounters
at Malacanan Palace, starting with the
reformist liberals who were entertained here

in the late 1860s and, shortly after, brutally
suppressed following the Cavite Mutiny of
1872. 1121 The National Hero Jose Rizal was
an occasional visitor in his advocacy for
reform and progress and the exhibit features
a significant quantity of rare Rizaliana
from the Palace collections, as well as items
related to such personages as Apolinario
Mabini, Felix Resurreccion Hidalgo,
Maximo Viola, and Ferdinand Blumentritt.
With the outbreak of the Philippine
Revolution in 1896 and the establishment of
the First Philippine Republic in 1899 (after
the overthrow of Spanish rule by the United
States the previous year), Filipinos were
fighting a war of independence, substantially
ended only after President Emilio Aguinaldo
(1899-1901) was captured and brought to
Malacanan Palace. After being held under
house arrest, he dissolved the Republic on
April 1, 1901. l 13 l

ENDNOTES

[1J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malcahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 220-223.

[2] Ibid., 232.

[3] Ibid., 233.

[4] Ibid., 198.

[5] Ibid., 280.

[6] Ibid., 231.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid., 230.

[9] Ibid., 228.

[10] Ibid., 148.

[11] Ibid., 147.

[12] Ibid., 76.

[13] Ibid., 123 and 127.

278

Mabini Hall

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

Mabini Hall began as the Budget Building with
the creation of the Budget Commission (now
the Department of Budget and Management)
in 1936. After World War II, it housed the
Supreme Court, as the Ayuntamiento de
Manila had been destroyed during the Battle
for Manila in February 1945.

In the postwar years, it was expanded on either
side to form a greatly enlarged Administration
Building containing the majority of
administrative offices in the Palace compound.
Plans to demolish it and build a high rise
building in its place after it was gutted in a

fire in 1992 were completely dropped due to
budgetary constraints. President Fidel V. Ramos
supervised its reconstruction as a spartan but
well-ventilated and lit office complex, and
renamed it Mabini Hall. [1]

ENDNOTES

[1J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malcahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 286.

279

Malaeaeang Park and
.Bahay Pamgarap

MANUEL L. QUEZON III

Malacanang Park was created when rice
fields on the south bank of the Pasig River
across from the official residence of the
President of the Philippines were acquired
on orders of President Manuel L. Quezon
in 1936-1937. Intended as a recreational
retreat, the main features of the planned
complex for the park were three buildings:
a recreation hall for official entertaining, a
community assembly hall for conferences
with local government officials, and a rest
house directly opposite the Palace across the
Pasig River which would serve as the venue
for informal activities and social functions of
the President and First Family. 111

Two buildings were built prior to World War
II. The first was a presidential rest house with
a swimming pool, and the other, a recreation
hall for official entertaining. The buildings
constructed by the Bureau of Public Works
were the product of designs by Architects
Juan Arellano and Antonio Toledo. The
prewar park contained, in addition to the
rest house and recreation hall, a putting
green, stables, and shell tennis courts. 121

During the Japanese Occupation, President
Jose P. Laurel had a community assembly hall
built, and the putting green was expanded
into a small golf course after an assassination
attempt on him took place in Wack-Wack
golf coursed 31 The existing gazebo in the golf
course dates to the Laurel administration.

President Manuel Roxas further improved
the golf course in Malacanang Park and
maintained a truck garden as part of
the food self-sufficiency program of his
administration.

PHOTO: Malacanan Park, Manila, circa January 23,
1940. Photo courtesy of Presidential Museum and
Library.

280

During the administration of President
Ramon Magsaysay, an estero was filled in
joining the properties of Malacanang Park
and the Bureau of Animal Industry, as part
of a Government Service Insurance System
(GSIS) housing project for presidential
guards and other workers. The Park grounds
were refurbished through the efforts of First
Lady Evangeline Macapagal in the early
1960s. She renamed the rest house Bahay
Pangarap (“house of dreams”).

During presidency of Ferdinand E. Marcos,
Malacanang Park became increasingly
identified with the Presidential Guards. It was
during the Marcos administration that the
Bureau of Animal Industry building became
the headquarters of the Presidential Guards
(today a component unit of the Presidential
Security Group or PSG). General Fabian
Ver gained jurisdiction over some of the
historic buildings, including the recreation
hall, which became (and remains) the PSG
gymnasium, and the community assembly
hall which was turned into the presidential
escorts building. 141

Under President Fidel V. Ramos, Bahay
Pangarap was restored and became the
club house of the Malacanang Golf Club
(the old Club House had become the
residence of President Marcos’ mother, Mrs.
Josefa Edralin Marcos). 151 Restoration was
supervised by Architect Francisco Manosa at
the initiative of then First Lady Amelita M.
Ramos and inaugurated as the new Bahay
Pangarap on March 15, 1996 as an alternate
venue for official functions in addition to
recreational and social activities.

In 2008, the historic Bahay Pangarap was
essentially demolished by Architect Conrad
Onglao and rebuilt in the contemporary style
(retaining the basic shape of the roof as a nod
to the previous historic structure), replacing,
as well, the Commonwealth-era swimming
pool and pergolas with a modern swimming
pool. It was inaugurated on December
19, 2008 by President Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo at a Christmas reception for the
Cabinet. Administrative Order No. 251,
issued on December 22, 2008, placed the
administration of Bahay Pangarap under the
Internal House Affairs Office of the Private
Office of the President of the Philippines.

Malacanang Park has always been a
recreational park, and is not a military facility.
The facilities and area of the PSG are distinct
from the demarcation of Malacanang Park.

In August 2010, President Benigno S.
Aquino III became the first President of
the Philippines to make Bahay Pangarap
his official residence, although previous
presidents have stayed there.

ENDNOTES

[1J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malcanan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 288.

[2] Ibid., 199-200.

[3] Ibid., 209.

[4] Ibid., 256.

[5] Ibid., 297.

281

New Executive Buildin

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

In 1936, President Manuel L. Quezon was the
first to propose the purchase of the nearby
San Miguel Brewery as additional office space
for Malacanang. Later, President Ferdinand
E. Marcos initiated plans to transform it into
an integral part of the Palace. However, it was
only under President Corazon C. Aquino that
the actual reconstruction took place.

The building’s architecture are an homage to
the Palace of the Third Republic. It serves the
very utilitarian purpose of providing much-
needed administrative space. Nevertheless,
its newness and lack of proximity to the
Palace led Corazon C. Aquino’s successors
to revert back to using the Palace for official

business, starting with President Fidel V.
Ramos. Currently, it houses the Office of the
Presidential Spokesperson, the Presidential
Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office, the Presidential
Communications Operations Office, and the
Malacanang Press Briefing Room. 111

ENDNOTES

[1 J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malcahan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Makati City: Studio 5 Publishing,
2005), 284.

282

Mansion House

JUSTIN GATUSLAO AND JEAN ARBOLEDA

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

The Mansion House — located at the eastern part
of Baguio City, along Leonard Wood Road and
across Wright Park — has been the official summer
residence of the Presidents of the Philippines since
the Commonwealth. It was originally built to be the
seat of power of the American colonial government
during the summer months.

CONCEPTION, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION OF
THE MANSION HOUSE

In 1904, United States Secretary of War, and former
Governor-General of the Philippines, William
Howard Taft commissioned Chicago architect and
city planner Daniel Burnham — via a family friend

of Burnham’s, the newly appointed
Commissioner of Commerce and
Police in the Philippines, William
Cameron Forbes — to submit plans
for the administrative capital,
Manila, and the proposed summer
capital in Baguio. Baguio was much
favored among colonial government
officials for its cooler climate; clamor
to develop the area ran steady at the
time. In 1905, after a six-week stay
in the Philippines, Burnham began
to draw up the city plans, of which
he wrote: “The Manila scheme is
very good. The Baguio scheme is
emerging and begins to warrant
hope of something unusual among
cities.”

283

PHOTO: William Howard Taft, atop a water buffalo.
Photo courtesy of Miller Center, University of Virginia.

Burnham plan for the improvement of
Baguio.” By virtue of Philippine Commission
Act No. 1495, enacted on May 26, 1906,
Parsons was appointed Consulting Architect
to the government, and he would stay in
the Philippines in this capacity for the next
nine years. His term coincided with Forbes’;
the two would work closely together in the
planning of the two cities, which included
projects such as the building of the Philippine
General Hospital, the Manila Hotel, and the
Mansion House in the highlands of Baguio.

Forbes took a keen interest in Baguio City and
made the “City of Pines” his pet project. He
thus spearheaded the building of what would
serve as the seat of the American Colonial
Government in the summer months — but
what had initially only addressed the need to
house the wife of Governor General James
Francis Smith, who intimated to Forbes that
she could not stand the heat of Manila. The
contract for the construction of the summer
residence was awarded on December 4,
1906, with an appropriation of $15,000
from the Philippine Treasury; construction
took a year, beginning in 1907.

There were initially two choices for
the location of the Governor General’s
residence: one was on the site overlooking
the big spring — which is the source of
the Bued River immediately south of the
sanitarium proper (the present site of Baguio
General Hospital) — to make it visible to
the government center; the other option
was at the edge of Pacdal Plateau, called
Outlook Point, in case the Governor General
preferred to live farther away from official
activities. Pacdal Plateau prevailed. The 1905
Baguio plan prepared by Burnham reflected

284

PHOTO: The Burnham plan for the improvement of
Baguio. Photo from Daniel H. Burnham: Plans for
the Philippines • A Project for Art.

the Governor General’s residence at this
location. On March 21, 1908, at the onset of
summer, the household of Governor General
Smith moved into the Mansion House.

The design of the summer residence,
prepared by Parsons, was in accordance
with the City Beautiful Movement — the
architectural reform philosophy prevalent
in North America at the time, and of which
Daniel Burnham was a pioneer. Inmates
from the Bilibid Prison in Manila were
sent to Baguio to care of the vast estate,
in exchange for the commutation of their
sentences. A professional nurseryman from
Scotland and ground staff from Nagasaki,
Japan were hired to supervise the gardens, of
which Forbes — soon to be Governor-General
himself — had extensively written:

[Dated April 25, 1909] We have a wonderful
plan for the Governor’s place here— a
shrubbery and a maze, a labyrinth, on one
side; a formal park in front with terraces and
many flowering trees brought from strange
and far lands, amaranths, marvelous flaming
poppocathartelians and the like, a great
array of flower beds and flower gardens on
the other side; with two huge porches and

two large wings, one of which will have the
assembly or ballroom, and a billiard room,
with guest rooms above, and the other with
banquet hall, kitchen, servants' quarters and
service places. Then the main house will have
one side for social, and the other for business
duties.

[Dated August 17, 1909] I have designed
a maze or labyrinth, to go on one side, a
difficult one to enter, a large flower garden, a
shrubbery, and the veritable mass of trees—
poplars for one of the avenues; spruces for the
large circle, hibiscus and arbour vitae hedges;
an avenue of eucalyptus, groves of orange and
flame trees; an avenue of acacias, and another
of magnolias, and one of fern palms.

The summer residence was named after
Forbes’ ancestral home in the family-owned
Naushon Island near the Massachusetts
coast. Thus, the correct usage in reference to
the structure is “Mansion House,” because
of its association with an extant building.
(In plans dated 1913, 1917, and 1928, the
structure was already recognized by the
name Forbes had christened it with.)

THE COMMONWEALTH PERIOD

Upon the establishment of the Commonwealth
Government of the Philippines in 1935, use
of Malacanan Palace in Manila — as both
residence and official seat — was granted
to the newly elected President Manuel L.
Quezon. Public Act No. 4204, approved
on July 23, 1935, authorized the U.S. High
Commissioner to the Government of the
Commonwealth of the Philippine Islands —
the outgoing, and very last, Governor-
General of the Philippines Frank Murphy —

to temporarily occupy the Mansion House
as residence and office “until such time a
suitable residence was constructed.”

Just as Merritt and then Taft had sought
residence at the Palace, it was now Quezon's
wish to do so, for the very same reasons of
compelling symbolism. Some Americans
believed that the High Commissioner, as
Murphy was now called, should remain at
Malacanan— for, after all, the United States still
exercised sovereignty over the Philippines. But
the time for a Filipino resident was deemed
nigh, and Murphy moved out, staying in the
Mansion House in Baguio until his official
home on the shore of Manila Bay would be
complete™

President Quezon himself, however, hardly
used the Mansion House; in 1930, the
Quezons had built a summer residence of

their own in Baguio City, overlooking the
city and Burnham Park. “It took me a full
month,” wrote President Quezon in his
memoirs, “to convince Mrs. Quezon that
she should leave our home in Pasay, outside
Manila, for the historic Palace of Malacanan
in Manila; but I never succeeded in making
her go and live at the Mansion House in
Baguio.”

Baguio was the summer capital of the
Philippines. Located there is what is called
"The Mansion House,” a modern building built
and rebuilt by American Governors-General.
It is on top of a hill and the views from the
Mansion are wonderful. A park with pine trees,
flower gardens, ample lawns, a few fountains,
an artificial lake, a tennis court and bridle path
form the beautiful grounds, in the center of
which stands the summer Executive Mansion.
I seldom stayed in this official residence.™

When news of the Second World War broke
out, President Quezon was staying with his
younger daughter Zeneida at their private
house; he had sojourned to Baguio to recover
from an illness.

At the dawn of the Commonwealth period,
Francis Burton Harrison — Governor General
from 1913 to 1921 and thereafter a top

286

political advisor to President Quezon — wrote
in his journals about the Mansion House —
which he had referred to, while he was serving
as Governor General, as “a cottage allowed
[the Governor General] in the mountains of
Baguio.” To wit: Harrison commented on
renovations to the Mansion House in a journal
entry dated December 27, 1935, noting that
it was “double the size it was in my days.
Instead of a wooden second story with sawali
walls between the bedrooms as formerly, it is
now a really modern mansion re-constructed
by Governor General [Dwight F.] Davis.” [The
sawali walls are in keeping with Parsons’ style
of integrating local architectural techniques
into the overall aesthetics of the City Beautiful
Movement; the original windows in his design
of the Parsons-designed Manila Hotel, for
example, used capiz panels, which was both
a concession to the local climate and a nod to
traditional building materials.] Several days
later, on January 1, 1936, Harrison would
write of a New Year’s reception hosted by
the High Commissioner, held on the Mansion
House grounds, “as per custom.”

DAMAGE DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR

On December 1944, President Jose P. Laurel
and his party evacuated to the Mansion
House. President Laurel thereafter described
what was to become a three-month stay
“somber and miserable.” Parts of the structure
were damaged due to constant bombing
and strafing, rendering the residence almost
uninhabitable. In his war memoirs, President
Laurel would write extensively about the
destruction:

I was in Baguio from the time of my arrival

there, around 7:00 p.m., December 21, to

around 9:00 p.m. of March 22, 1945. [...] After
installing ourselves the best we could, we found
ourselves virtually in a concentration camp. All
the Ministers, including Gen. Francisco, came
with their military police, two for each. I came
with a greater number of military police and
the Mansion House compound was surrounded
by a strong detachment of Japanese soldiers. I
and my family took quarters in the Guest House
and Speaker Aquino, Generals Francisco and
Capinpin and Mr. Hamamoto (representative
of the High Army Command) lived in the
Mansion House. Later on, because of bombing
and destruction of their cottages, Minister
Osias and family, Spokesman Luz and family,
Secretary Abello and family, Minister Tirana and
family, Director Neri and family, Dr. Macasaet
and family, moved to the Mansion House. We
were terribly crowded in the compound. The
Presidential Guards, the military police, the
servants were also in the compound. Lack of
food, water and medicine, poor sanitation,
constant bombing and strafing made life in
the Mansion House Compound somber and
miserable.

The stenographer of the Executive Office was
hit by machine gun bullet and killed. We buried
him and I delivered a short funeral oration. Two
of the Presidential Guards were killed when
a bomb fell on the water-pump station near
the garage of the Mansion House. What was
believed to be at least a 250-lb. bomb fell about
10 yards exactly in front of the Guest House and
opened up a huge crater, breaking up crystals,
windows, doors but not rendering the House
wholly uninhabitable. Then, both the Guest
and Mansion houses were machine-gunned.
Houses around the Mansion compound were
hit and burned; one bomb fell on the right side
of the Mansion but did not explode though it

287

penetrated 6 meters deep into the ground;
another bomb fell 4 meters from my shelter
but did not explode either but it penetrated 6
meters deep into the soil. My family occupied
the air-raid shelter built for the Quezons four
years ago, which hardly offered any security;
everybody started to dig a fox-hole for
immediate use. It was in the midst of danger
and difficulties, suffering, fear and anxiety that
we lived in Baguio, completely ignorant of
what was happening in Manila and other parts
of the Islands— except what the Domei News
Agency mimeographed news contained—
which was completely unreliable. No light most
of the time, no means of communication, no
gasoline or alcohol even for the members of
the Cabinet to get together, we were not able
to do anything worthwhile in Baguio.™

[...]

To keep up the spirit to live and make the blood
circulate, we dug and improved our fox-holes
and air-raid shelters and occasionally played
golf even in the midst of an air raid.™

[...]

Near the middle of March 1945, the Guest
House was again attacked by American planes.
One bomb hit the entrance of the House;
another, the flagpole hoisting the Filipino flag
and pine tree in front; and another, the left side
of the building— almost completely destroying
the building and rendering it uninhabitable.
But assembling blown-up pieces of lumber
here and there, patching up broken windows
and doors with pieces of cloth and paper-
sleeping in dugouts, others sleeping in the
open air under the pine trees, with scanty
food available, polluted water, no light— it
was evident that we could not remain much
longer. During nights, the whizzing or wailing
sound of cannon over and across the Mansion
compound did not permit us to sleep.™

Minister of Finance Antonio de las Alas
also wrote of the Mansion House, this time
providing a glimpse into the operations of
the government of the Second Philippine
Republic at the height of the war:

On Sunday, March 18, we were called to a
special meeting of the Cabinet at the Mansion
House. All the Ministers were there with the
exception of Yulo, Sison, and Roxas. It was a
very solemn meeting. The President spoke
for more than an hour. We consider it one of
the best speeches that he made. He explained
that Ambassador Murata had seen him to
transmit the wish of the Japanese Supreme
Council to have the President, the members of
his Cabinet, the Speaker, and the Chief Justice
brought to Japan.™

[...]

[Dated March 20] The next day, Exec. Sec.
Emilio Abello sent us a note that the President
would like us to go to the Mansion House
early. We went at two o'clock that afternoon.
We had our picture taken with the President.
In the picture was the Filipino flag, which
the President had been using and which was
almost completely torn from the bombing of
the Mansion House.™

FROM POST-WAR REHABILITATION TO
CONTEMPORARY TIMES

The Laurel administration’s use of the
Mansion House as de facto seat of government
was not the first time the summer residence
hosted official gatherings of the state. During
his term as Governor General, Forbes opened
the gates of the Mansion House to host
Filipino delegates for the special session of
the Second Philippine Legislature, held from
March 19 to April 28, 1910.

288

In 1947, the heavily damaged Mansion
House was rebuilt at a cost of P80,000, with
additional guest rooms and conference rooms
constructed. It would then serve as venue for
important events: such as the second session
of the United Nations Economic Commission
for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) in 1947;
the second session of the United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization in 1948;
and the first meeting of the Southeast Asian
Union, more commonly known as the Baguio
Conference of 1950, which was conceived and
convened by President Elpidio Quirino. The
Baguio Conference was held on the invitation
of President Quirino, and with the support of
United Nations President Carlos P. Romulo;
representatives from Australia, Ceylon, India,
Indonesia, Pakistan, and Thailand attended.

Photo courtesy of Presidential Museum and Library.

Later Presidents reinstated the Mansion
House’s status as summer retreat, and made
their own impressions on the structure.
President Ferdinand E. Marcos wrote in his
diaries about playing golf at the Mansion
House grounds; President Joseph Ejercito
Estrada would build a two-storey building
within the compound to house staff; and
President Gloria MacapagaTArroyo would
fully revive the annual hegira to Baguio.

On the centenary of the Mansion House
on December 30, 2008, President Arroyo
and the National Historical Institute (now
the National Historical Commission of the
Philippines) unveiled two historical markers —
one in English, and the other containing the
text translated in Filipino — detailing the
structure’s history. On January 16, 2009, the
board of the National Historical Institute,
through Resolution No. 1, s. 2009, declared
the Mansion House a National Historical
Landmark. On May 18, 2010, President
Arroyo, by virtue of Executive Order No.
880, authorized the Malacanang Museum
(now the Presidential Museum and Library)
to establish a branch museum in the Mansion
House.

PHOTO: The Mansion House gate. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

289

President Benigno S. Aquino III resides in
a two-storey building within the Mansion
House compound whenever he is in Baguio
City; his last official visit to the summer capital
was during the commencement exercises of
the Philippine Military Academy’s Siklab
Diwa class, on March 16, 2014. Barracks for
security personnel and the President’s staff are
also located within the premises.

The 105th anniversary of the Mansion House
was celebrated last December 2013.

ENDNOTES

[1 J Manuel L. Quezon III, Paulo Alcazaren,
and Jeremy Barns, Malacanan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Manila: Studio 5 Publishing, 2005),
158.

[2] Manuel L. Quezon, The Good Fight
(New York, NY: W. Morgan Shuster,
1944), 172.

[3] Jose P. Laurel, War Memoirs of Dr.

Jose P. Laurel (Manila: Jose P. Laurel
Foundation, 1962), 34-35.

[4] Ibid., 35.

[5] Ibid., 36-37.

[6] Celia Diaz-Laurel, Doy Laurel (Manila:
Celia Diaz-Laurel, 2005), 11-12.

[7] Ibid., 13.

290

Presidential Yachts

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

THE APO (1921-1932)

PHOTO: Th e Apo. Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Museum and Library.

The Apo was a steam yacht built in Kinghorn,
Scotland, in 1898. It was initially called the
Cem but was later on renamed to The Amelia
III after it was acquired by King Carlos of
Portugal. In 1906, it was purchased by Henry
Clay Pierce, and the name was changed to the
Yacona. It was acquired by the United States
Navy and commissioned in 1917. After it
was decommissioned at Engineer Island,
Manila, in 1921, it was transferred to the
Insular Government of the Philippine Islands
and renamed Apo. Designated as the official
yacht of the Governor-General, it was used
for inspection voyages by Leonard Wood,
Henry Stimson, Dwight Davis, and Theodore
Roosevelt Jr. In 1932, it was returned to the
United States Federal Government.

THE CAS I AN A/BAN AH AW (1936-1941)

PHOTO: The Presidential yacht Casiana renamed
Banahaw brought over to the Philippines all the
way from Los Angeles arriving here at noon of
November 25th. On the night of the same day of
the president left on the Casiana for a brief southern
islands’ tour. The yacht was formerly owned by L.E
Dohery, multi millionaire. Graphic, November 3, 1936.
Photo from the Histogravure of Manuel L. Quezon.

The Cassandra , an steam yacht, was built in
1908. It was acquired by oil tycoon Edward
L. Doheny and renamed the Casiana , after
his first major oil well in Mexico. In 1936,
the Commonwealth government acquired
it for $50,000, and the ship arrived in
Manila on November 25 of the same year.
The name was changed to Banahaw, and it
was made part of the Coast Guard service,
although, primarily, it was reserved for use

291

of the President and his family. On December
29, 1941, it sunk off Fort Mills wharf,
Corregidor, by Japanese bombing.

PHOTO: The wrecked Casiana. Photo from
“Philippine Expeditionary Force” published in 1943,
courtesy of Mr. Chad Hill.

THE ORCHID (1946-1948)

The Orchid (WAGL-240) was a 190-
foot Manzanita Class vessel built in New
Jersey. Its keel was laid on October 1907;
it was launched on May 1908, and was
commissioned on August 1908 to the United
States Lighthouse Service, which was merged

with the Coast Guard in 1939. It was called
the Orchid in line with the Lighthouse
Service’s tradition of using flora as names
for certain vessels (tenders, in particular),
which was continued by the Coast Guard.
With its sister ships, the Anemone, Sequoia,
and the Tulip, the Orchid was transferred to
the Philippines when it was decommissioned
on December 1945. It was used by President
Manuel Roxas.

THE APO/PAGASA/SANTA MARIA
(1948-1959)

■v

•f'

The second Apo was an Admirable-class
minesweeper laid down on November 24,
1943 by the Gulf Shipbuilding Corporation
in Alabama. On March 16, 1944, it was
launched, and on October 25, 1944, was
commissioned as the USS Quest (AM 281).
She received two battle stars during World
War II. It was decommissioned on May
2, 1946 and struck from the Navy register
on September 29, 1947. It was renamed
Dalisay when it was transferred to the
Republic of the Philippines on July 2, 1948.
It was then renamed Pagasa, by President
Ramon Magsaysay, and again to Santa
Maria by President Carlos P. Garcia, after
his hometown. In 1959, it was replaced by
the new presidential yacht, the Lapu-Lapu,
but continued to serve as the alternate
yacht. With the designation TK-21, it was
renamed three times by President Diosdado

292

Macapagal as the Corregidor (1963), Pagasa
(1964), and Incorruptible (1965). However,
the name was reverted to Pag-Asa (1966) and
finally changed to Mount Samat by President
Ferdinand E. Marcos in 1967. The ship was
decommissioned on September 21, 1993 and
sunk off Sangley Point.

THE LAPU-LAPU/ROXAS/THE PRESIDENT/
PAG-ASA/ANG PANGULO (1959-PRESENT)

What is now known as the BRP Ang Pangulo
was obtained during the was obtained during
the Garcia administration as part of the
war reparations given to the Philippines by
Japan. It was built at the Ishikawajima dry-
docks in Tokyo, and was known then as Bow
No. 77. On July 16, 1958, its keel was laid at
the Harume Yard, and the ship was launched
on October 16 of the same year. Under the
command of Lieutenant Commander Manuel
Mandapat, its first commanding officer, sea
trials were conducted on February 9 and 10,
1959. President Garcia designated it as the
flagship of the Philippine Navy on February
14, 1959 and brought it to the Philippines
on February 28, 1959. It was first named the
RPS Lapu-Lapu, commissioned on on March
7, 1959. The ship joined the Philippine Fleet
in Manila on April 2, 1959. It saw its first

presidential engagement on April 7, 1959
and was sent on its first mission on April 19,
1959. It successfully completed a trade and
cultural exposition at the ports of Vietnam,
Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Hong Kong,
Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan on June 4,
1959. Since then, the ship was mainly used
for relief, emergency search and rescue,
patrol, auxiliary transport, and command-
vessel purposes, above its duties to the
president and his government.

President Macapagal,
on December 31,
1961, removed it as
the flagship of the
Philippine Navy. On
October 9, 1962, the
ship was renamed RPS
Roxas, the first ship to
be named in honor of
a Philippine president.
In trying to stay true to his platform of
simplicity, President Macapagal never sailed
on the ship and used a different ship for his
sea-bound missions.

The ship was again renamed during
the Marcos administration as RPS The
President. It saw the most number of
engagements during this administration.
Reportedly the site of many lavish parties
of the Marcos family, it served as a venue
for entertaining important guests. Among
the notable guests that the Marcoses
entertained in the ship were British ballerina
Margot Fonteyn, actress Brooke Shields,
dancer Rudolf Nureyev, concert pianist Van
Cliburn, and Cristina Ford — former wife
of Henry Ford II, who was once chairman
of Ford Motor Co. On January 11, 1967,

Photo courtesy
of Presidential
Communications
Development and
Strategic Planning
Office.

293

President Marcos again renamed the ship,
now christening it as the BRP Ang Pangulo.
The Marcos administration also created a
seal for the presidential yacht.

After the 1986 EDSA Revolution, President
Corazon Aquino tried to do away with
all the lavishness and extravagance of the
previous administration. The ship was also
costing the government P400,000 a month
simply to maintain it. On September of
1986, the President put the ship up for sale
for $5.5 million, but it was not sold.

President Fidel V. Ramos, during his term,
entertained Chinese President Jiang Zeminin
on this yacht.

When President Joseph Estrada took office,
he had the yacht extensively refurbished. The
ship served as a venue for presidential events
and as a mobile office for the president. On
trips to Mindanao, President Estrada would
sail using the yacht, functioning as a mobile
Malacanang in the south.

In 2006, the presidential yacht caught on
fire while it was undergoing repairs in a
Batangas port. The ship reportedly incurred
only minor damage. After refurbishing and
repair, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,
on March 6, 2009, again changed the name
of the yacht to the BRP Pag- Asa.

On December 14, 2011, President Benigno
S. Aquino III rechristened the presidential
yacht with its old name, the BRP Ang
Pangulo. The yacht is set to join the Philippine
Fleet, which includes the newly refurbished
Hamilton-class Cutter named the BRP
Gregorio del Pilar. In his speech during

the christening,
the president said
this ship would
augment the

capabilities of the
Philippine Navy. On
December 7, 2011,
the Presidential
Communications
Development and
Strategic Planning
Office, in enforcing
its mandate to

PHOTO: Official
seal of the BRP Ang
Pangulo in 2011.
Photo courtesy
of Presidential
Communications
Development and
Strategic Planning
Office.

ensure consistency in
the implementation
of the corporate
identity of the Executive Department,
submitted to the Presidential Museum and
Library, which has curatorial control of the
presidential yacht by virtue of Executive
Order No. 880, s. 2010, a new design of the
seal of the BRP Ang Pangulo.

294

SPECIFICATIONS

Type:

Motor Yacht

Model:

Custom

Builder:

IHI Group

Year:

1959

Flag:

Philippines

Length Overall:

77.33 m

Beam:

13 M

Draft (max):

6.40 m

Gross Tonnage:

2200 tons

Guests:

Crew:

Hull Configuration:

Displacement

Hull Material:

Steel

Superstructure:

Steel

Quantity:

Manufacturer:

Mitsui B&W

Model:

DE642/VBF75

Power:

2,500 h p/1, 840 kW

Total Power:

5,000 h p/3, 680 kW

Propulsion:

Twin Screw

Max Speed:

18.0 kts

Cruising Speed:

15.0 kts

Range:

6,900 nm at 1 5 kts

Fuel Capacity:

372,000 1781,828.53 USG

295

Presidential Planes

JUSTIN GATUSLAO

The first President to fly in an aircraft
during his terms was President Manuel L.
Quezon during his evacuation flight from the
Philippines in 1942. Quezon and his family,
officials of the Commonwealth government,
including Vice President Sergio Osmena, flew
from the Del Monte field in Bukidnon to
Melbourne in Australia. 111

In the postwar years, Philippine Airlines (PAL)
was tasked to provide a presidential aircraft
to ferry the President for his state visits. PAL
secured “its most modern aircraft and best
crew during presidential flights”. In August
1949, a PAL DC-6 plane was designated
as President Elpidio Quirino’s presidential
plane when he visited Washington, D.C.
This was the first instance that a Philippine
president was able fly across the Pacific by
way of an official carrier. In 1952, PAL also
carried the president in his official trip to
Jakarta, Indonesia. 121

During President Ramon Magsaysay’s, in
1955, PAL was likewise commissioned to fly
the president for his state visit to Washington
D.C. in 1955. It was also during this time

that PAL, with the government, purchased a
new aircraft, the DC-7, an improved version
of DC-6B. 131 When President Carlos P. Garcia
succeeded Magsaysay in 1957, PAL was
still involved in ferrying the president to
other countries for his state visits: Japan on
December 1, 1958, to Saigon in Vietnam on
April 22, 1959, and to Taipei in Taiwan on
May 2, 1960. By this time, Garcia used “the
biggest and the most luxurious aircraft in the
fleet, the British- made turbo- prop Vickers
Viscount”. 141 When President Diosdado
Macapagal became president in 1961, his
presidential plane was a Fokker 29 jetliner,
officially called “Common Man.” 151161 In the
1970’s, PAL, which became a government
corporation during Ferdinand E. Marcos’
presidency, provided the “most modern
aircraft” for the Marcoses’ official and
personal travels. 171 Since 1980, the official
presidential aircraft has been a Fokker F-28.
Most other nations only use this type of
aircraft for military use.

The Armed Forces of the Philippines
mandated the 250th Presidential Airlift
Wing of the Philippine Air Force to serve

296

as the “sole unit tasked to provide safe,
secure, and effective air transportation to the
President of the Republic of the Philippines,
his / her family, visiting heads of state,
and other the local and foreign WIPs.” [SI
Other responsibilities include conducting
proficiency training of aircrew and support
personnel; performing organizational and
field maintenance of aircraft; coordinating
of aircraft requirements for presidential
flights; providing command and control
and communication for presidential flights;
providing presidential security augmentation
and flight safety and technical officers for
WIP movement locally and abroad. 191

The fleet is composed of a (1) Fokker F28,
(4) Bell 412 helicopters, (3) Sikorsky S- 76
helicopters, (2) Aerospatiale SA 330 Puma
helicopters, (1) Sikorsky S- 70-5 Black
Hawk, (1) Fokker F-27 Friendships, and a
number of Bell UH-1N Twin Hueys.

THE FOKKER F-28

Model

Fokker F-28

Production period:

1967-1987

Built:

241

Accidents/crash:

THE PRESIDENTIAL FOKKER F-28 JET

Popularly known as F-28 “Fellowship,” the
Presidential Fokker F-28 was manufactured
by Fokker Aviation BV (now defunct) in The
Netherlands. This model came out of the
Fokker factory in 1979 and was bought by
the Central Bank of the Philippines (CBP) for
the use of President Marcos. It was delivered
to the Philippines on September 1980, until

MT. PINATUBO,

DOUGLAS C-47 SKYTRAIN,
MARCH 17, 1957

On March 16, 1957, President Ramon Magsaysay
left Manila for Cebu City where he spoke at
three educational institutions: University of the
Visayas, University of Southern Philippines, and
Southwestern University. [1][2] Early the next day, at
quarter past 1 a.m., he boarded the Presidential
Plane "Mt. Pinatubo,” a new Douglas C-47. The
plane had been newly purchased with less than
100 hours of logged flight. Approximately 15
minutes later, the plane crashed into Mt. Manung-
gal in Central Cebu, killing the President and
24 others. [3] Nestor Mata, a reporter for the
Philippines Herald, was the lone survivor of the
plane crash. [4]

In a bulletin released by the Malacanang press
office, the Air Force, the Civil Aeronautics
Administration, the U.S. Air Force, and the
U.S. Navy were tasked to search the route area
between Cebu and Manila. At noon, reports arrived
that the ground search was negative. The search
team was also sent to places like Poro Point, La
Union, and Zambales in case President Magsaysay
decided to land there. Members of the Congress
and the Cabinet created a joint executive -
legislative committee that would assist the search
situation in Cebu. The committee was composed
of Secretaries Eulogio Balao, Florencio Moreno,
Oscar Ledesma and Paulino Garcia; Senators
Emmanuel Pelaez and Francisco Rodrigo; and
Representatives Daniel Z. Romualdez and
Cornelio Villareal. The following day, on March 18,
1957, President Magsaysay’s remains were found
by the rescuers in Cebu. The necrological services

297

its ownership was transferred from the
CBP to the Office of the President (OP) on
December 26, 1995. Finally, it was donated
to the Philippine Air Force (PAF) in May
2006.

As of March 11, 2011, its total flying time is
5,525 hrs. Its contemporaries are at 10,000
to more than 20,000 hrs. The plane’s last
mandatory inspection was a “D” check. This
is also known as a Heavy Maintenance visit
(HMV). This was a very detailed inspection
of the structure, which was done March 2009
in Indonesia. During the inspection in 2009,
added works were done such as: the cabin
interior was refurbished, seats were newly
upholstered, airshow/flight entertainment
was installed, and the exterior repainted.

PRESIDENTIAL BELL HELICOPTERS:

BELL 412

• There are at present five Bell 412
presidential helicopters

• All five Bell 412 helicopters were
delivered from Bell helicopter Textron
Company, USA

• Two Bell 412 helicopter with tail nos.
1998 and 2000 were delivered on 23
March 1994

• The other three Bell 412 helicopter with
tail nos. 1898, 1986 and 1896 were
delivered by the same company on 03
July 3, 1996

• These Bell 412s were funded by
the Common Aviation Unit of the
National Government of the Philippines
composed of BSP, DBP, GSIS, LBP,
PAGCOR and PNB.

for President Magsaysay was held the day after at
the Ceremonial Hall of Malacanan Palace. * 1 2 3 4 [5]

On April 27, 1957, a Senate committee began
probe on Magsaysay’s airplane crash. [6] General
Manuel F. Cabal of the Philippine Constabulary
attested that the crash was due to “metal
fatigue.” 171 These findings were also corroborated
by the Philippine Air Force and U.S. Air Force
investigation, specifically highlighting that the
right generator pencil drive shaft was broken off
due to metal fatigue. [8]

ACCIDENT SUMMARY 191

FATALITIES 1101

Passengers:

1. President Magsaysay

2. Education Secretary Gregorio Hernandez, Jr.

3. Rep. Pedro Lopez of Cebu

4. Brig. Gen. Benito Ebuen, PAF chief

5. Ex-Senator Tomas Cabili

6. Lt. Leopoldo Regis, junior presidential aide

March 17, 1957

Metal Fatigue

Mt. Manunggal, 22 miles
Northwest of Cebu City

1 (Nestor Mata, reporter)
Douglas C-47 Skytrain
Mt. Pinatubo
Philippine Air Force
Lahug Airport, Cebu City
Nichols Field, Pasay City

298

7. Jesus Paredes, Jr.

8. Nestor Mata, Philippines Herald (lone survivor)

9. Pablo Bautista, Liwayway Publications

10. Maj. Ramon Camus, appointments secretary

11. Paterno Magsaysay

12. Patricio Osmena, Malacanang assistant
protocol officer

13. Maj. Felipe Nunag, chief of security

14. Antonio Tiangco, security

15. Eduardo Reyes, security

16. Jose Sarcilla, valet

17. Celestino Teves, valet

18. Felix Manuel, Malacanang chief photographer

19. M/Sgt. Regino Manuel, DND movie cameraman

20. Cesar Rama 21. Jesus Rama

22. Maj. Florencio Pobre, pilot

23. Lt. Col. Alfred M. Bustamante

24. Capt. Manuel Navea, co-pilot

25. T/Sgt. Alfonso Ibe, chief of crew

26. Sgt. Isidro Fernandez, assistant chief

27. Staff Sgt. Raymundo Ruiz, radio operator

On April 7, 2009, a Bell 412 presidential
helicopter operated by the Philippine
Air Force crashed due to poor visibility
brought by bad weather. The eight fatalities
in the incident were three Palace officials,
three military personnel, and two pilots,
all passengers of the Bell 412 presidential
helicopter. The wreckage was found on a
steep slope within the boundaries of Benguet
and Ifugao. The chopper took off from
Loakan Airport late Tuesday afternoon was
supposed to go to Banaue town in Ifugao
province as advance party for President
Arroyo’s inspection.! 101

Aside from Press Undersecretary Capadocia,
aboard the aircraft were presidential military
aide Brig. Gen. Carlos Clet, Undersecretary

for Presidential Engagements and
Appointments Malou Frostrom, Presidential
Management Staff assistant director Perlita
Bandayanon, Navy Petty Officer 1 Demy
Reyno, and Perez. The pilots were identified
as Major Rolando Sacatani and Captain
Alvin Alegata.

S-70A BLACKHAWK HELICOPTER

• The S-70A Blackhawk presidential
helicopter was manufactured by
Sikorsky

• It was delivered on 07 March 1984
from the Foreign Military Sales (FMS)
of the United States Army

• It was given by the AFP to the
Philippine Air Force for use of the Office
of the President

• Total flying time: 3400 hrs

• President Marcos, Aquino, Ramos,
Estrada, Arroyo and Aquino III have
used it.

299

ENDNOTES (THE PRESIDENTIAL PLANES)

[1J Martin W. Bowman, B-17 Flying
Fortress Units of the Pacific War
(Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2003),
29-30.

[2] Meynardo P. Mendoza, “Binding the

Islands: Air Transport and State
Capacity Building in the Philippines,
1946 to 1961,” Philippine Studies:
Historical and Ethnographic
Viewpoints 61, no. 1 (2013): 77-104.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] “Diary of Ferdinand E. Marcos, July

4, 1969,” Philippine Diary Project,
accessed March 4, 2016, https://
philippinediaryproject.wordpress.
com/1 969/07/04/july-4-l 969/.

[6] “Official Week in Review: June 20 - June

26, 2965,” The Official Gazette of the
Republic of the Philippines, accessed
March 4, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1965/06/28/official-week-in-review-
june-20-june-26-1965/.

[7] Mendoza, “Binding the Islands,” 77-104.

[8] “PAF and PN are Kalayaan Flight,”

Presidential Security Group, accessed
March 4, 2016, https://www.psg.mil.
ph/paf-and-pn-are-kalayaan-flight/.

[9] “250th Presidential Airlift Wing,”

Philippine Air Force, accessed March 4,
2016, http://www.paf.mil.ph/aboutus/
units/description/250.html.

[10] Sophia Dedace, “Bodies of fatalities in
chopper crash all recovered - police,”
GMA News Online, April 9, 2009,
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/
story/1 56256/news/nation/bodies-
of-fatalities-in-chopper-crash-all-
recovered-police.

ENDNOTES (MT. PINATUBO)

[1] Jose V. Abueva, Ramon Magsaysay:

A Political Biography (Manila:
Solidaridad Publishing House, 1971),
484.

[2] “Official Month in Review: March

16 - March 31, 1957,” Official
Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed February 29,
2016, http://www.gov.ph/1957/03/31/
official-month -in-review-march- 16-
march-31-1957/.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Leon O. Tuy, “Nestor Mata’s story,

April 6, 1957,” Philippines Free Press,
accessed February 24, 2016, https://
philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 957/04/06/nestor-matas-story-
april-6-1957/.

[5] “Official Month in Review,” http://www.

gov.ph/1 957/03/3 1/official-month-in-
review-march- 1 6-march-3 1-1957/.

[6] “Magsaysay’s Death Crash: Probe

Begins,” Singapore Free Press,

April 27, 1957, accessed March
2, 2016, http://eresources.nlb.gov.
sg/newspapers/Digitised/ Article/
freepressl9570427-1.2.22.aspx.

[7] “Nestor Mata: After Falling from

Heaven, a Passionate Life of Music,
Journalism, Chess, and Art,” Manila
Bulletin, November 18, 2012,
accessed March 2, 2016, https://
sg.news.yahoo.com/nestor-mata-
falling-heaven-passionate-life-music-
j ournalism-0 8 1126839 .html.

[8] Abueva, Ramon Magsaysay, 232.

[9] “Official Month in Review,” http://www.

gov.ph/1 957/03/3 1/official-month-in-
review-march- 1 6-march-3 1-1957/.

[10] Ibid.

300

uezoe

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

HISTORY OF THE QUEZON SERVICE CROSS

The Quezon Service Cross was proposed
by President Manuel Roxas in honor of
President Manuel L. Quezon to serve as the
highest honor of the Republic. On August
2, 1946, President Roxas, in a message,
submitted a proposed Joint Resolution to
Congress for the creation of Quezon Service
Cross, the highest award the republic could
bestow. President Roxas in his message said:

“I am proposing that the President be
authorized to make such awards, with the
concurrence of the Congress. The resolution
itself limits the type of nominations which
may be made; this should be the highest
national recognition of outstanding civilian
service in the gift of the Republic.”™

Thus, the Quezon Service Cross was created
by virtue of Joint Resolution No. 4, s. 1946
enacted by both houses of Congress. Three
individuals were awarded prior to the
abolition of the Third Republic in 1972.

Although Congress was abolished upon the
declaration of Martial Law, the Quezon
Service Cross remained but was not awarded
to any individual.

In the reforms of the awards system of the
Republic in 2003, Executive Order No. 236
retained the original intention of President
Roxas to have the Quezon Service Cross as
the highest decoration of the Philippines.
Therefore, in the Order of Precedence of
Philippine Honors and State Decorations the
Quezon Service Cross is the top recognition
a Filipino can receive from the Republic.

The Quezon Service Cross is unique in that
the President nominates individuals (limited
to Filipino citizens only), but the nomination
must be approved by Congress.

Since its creation in 1946, only five people,
to date, have been awarded the Quezon
Service Cross. The latest recipient was
former Secretary of the Interior and Local
Government Jesse M. Robredo, who
was conferred on November 26, 2012.

301

The following is the roster of recipients:

PHOTO: Carlos P. Romulo (April 12, 1951). Photo
courtesy of the Presidential Museum and Library.

PHOTO: Emilio Aguinaldo (June 12, 1956) Photo
courtesy of the National Historical Commision of the
Philippines.

t-. ‘

MJ J.i

PHOTO: Ramon Magsaysay (posthumous)

(July 4, 1957). Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Museum and Library.

PHOTO: Benigno S. Aquino Jr. (posthumous)
(August 21, 2004). Photo courtesy of Ninoy, the
Willing Martyr.

302

PHOTO: Jesse M. Robredo (posthumous)
(November 26, 2012). Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL WEEK
IN REVIEW PRINTED IN THE OFFICIAL
GAZETTE:

June 12, 1956 (Official Gazette Vol. 52, No.
6) - “President Magsaysay this morning cited
General Emilio Aguinaldo for his exceptional
and meritorious services as the Supreme
Filipino Revolutionary General during the fight
for Philippine independence against Spain
and as the President of the First Philippine
Republic.”

At the same time, the President conferred
upon General Emilio Aguinaldo the Quezon
Service Cross “for exemplary service to
the nation in memory of the late Manuel L.
Quezon.”

The citation and the Quezon Service Cross
were presented to Aguinaldo by Vice President
and concurrently Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Carlos P. Garcia this morning at the Aguinaldo
residence in Kawit, Cavite, on the occasion of
the 58th anniversary of the First Philippine
Republic. The Vice-President made the
presentation on behalf of the President.

The citation praised General Aguinaldo for “his
staunch belief in the principles of Freedom
that animated his career, first as a member
of the Katipunan and then as the outstanding
leader of the Revolutionary Movement; his
unshaken confidence in the capability of the
Filipino people to govern themselves and work
out their national identity; and his unflinching
devotion to the noble mission of freeing the
Philippines from foreign domination by his
proclamation of an independent Filipino
government on May 24, 1898, which, on June
12 the same year, asserted the independence
of the Philippines.”

The award of the Quezon Service Cross had
been made by virtue of the provisions of
Joint Resolution No. 4 of the Congress of
the Philippines, dated October 21, 1946, This
resolution created the Quezon Service Cross,
“for exemplary service to the nation in memory
of the late President Manuel L. Quezon.”

July 4, 1957 (Official Gazette Vol. 53, No. 13)
- The President presented the posthumous
award of the Quezon Service Cross on the late
President Ramon Magsaysay in ceremonies
held at the Malacanang social hall this evening
in connection with the observance of the 11th
anniversary of the Republic of the Philippines.

303

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

The award was presented to Mrs. Luz B.
Magsaysay, widow of the late President, in the
presence of officers and members of the 11th
Civic Assembly of Women (CAWP), Cabinet
members, members of the diplomatic corps
and and their ladies, and the representatives
of various civic organizations gathered at
Malacanang to witness this year's awarding
of presidential medals of merit under the
sponsorship of the CAWP.

CRITERIA

Joint Resolution No. 4 of 1946, and
Executive Order No. 236, 2003, states that
an individual should have performed an
“exemplary service to the nation in such a
manner and such a degree as to add great
prestige to the Republic of the Philippines, or
as to contribute to the lasting benefit of its

people. Nominations for this award shall be
accomplished by a statement of the services
meriting the award and shall be made only
in cases where the service performed or
contribution made can be measured on the
scale established by the national benefaction
of the late President Manuel L. Quezon.”

PROCESS OF CONFERMENT

Unlike other state honors and decorations,
the Quezon Service Cross can only be
awarded with the concurrence of both
houses of congress and the President of the
Philippines. It is the only award that requires
congressional resolution in order to be
conferred upon individuals.

The process of nomination and awarding of
the Quezon Service Cross is as follows:

1. Nominations for the Quezon Service Cross
are submitted to the Honors Committee
for their consideration;

2. The Honors Committee submits their
recommendation to the President of the
Philippines;

3. Upon the President’s approval, he executes
a letter to the leadership of both the House
of Representatives and the Senate of the
Philippines for Congress’ approval;

4. A Resolution shall be enacted by each
chamber concurring with the nomination
of conferment of the Quezon Service Cross
upon an individual;

5. The Quezon Service Cross is awarded by
the President of the Philippines.

304

DIAGRAM OF THE QUEZON SERVICE CROSS

Republic of the Philippines

Office of the President
Quezon Serv ice Cross
Ribbon Specifications
Scale: 1 :1mm

Sampaguita Wreath

Color Specification: CMYK
Red: CO M90 Y65 KIO
Yellow: CO MI8 Y85 KO
Green: C76 MO Y95 K50

Ball Finials

Sic Floret Respublica

“Let the Republic flourish"

Maltese Cross

Gold Sunburst

President Manuel L. Quezon

Ribbon

Equal white-green-white-
green-etc. stripes

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

ENDNOTES

[1 J “Message of President Roxas recommending the creation of a “Quezon Cross of

Service, August 2, 1946,” Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines, accessed
on March 17, 2016, http://www.gov.ph/1946/08/02/message-of-president-roxas-
recommending-the-creation-of-a-quezon-cross-of-service/.

305

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION, AND MARK BLANCO

HISTORY

The Order of Lakandula was created by
virtue of Executive Order No. 236, s. 2003,
the Honors Code of the Philippines. It is the
Order of Political and Civic Merit of the
Republic, conferred in commemoration of
Lakandula’s dedication to the responsibilities
of leadership, prudence, fortitude, courage,
and resolve in the service of one’s people. It
is one of the Senior Honors of the Republic
together with the Philippine Legion of
Honor (conferred for Military and Defense
Merit) and the Order of Sikatuna (conferred
for Diplomatic Merit). The Order of
Lakandula is conferred by the President of
the Philippines.

CRITERIA

The Order of Lakandula is conferred upon a
Lilipino or foreign citizen:

1. Who has demonstrated by his life and
deeds a dedication to the welfare of
society;

2. Whose life is worthy of emulation by the
Lilipino people;

3. Lor deeds worthy of particular recognition,
including suffering materially for the

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

preservation and defense of the democratic
way of life and of the territorial integrity
of the Republic of the Philippines, for
devoting his life to the peaceful resolution
of conflict, or for demonstrating an
outstanding dedication to the fostering of
mutual understanding, cultural exchange,
justice, and dignified relations among
individuals; or

4. Lor acts that have been traditionally
recognized by the institution of presidential
awards, including meritorious political
and civic service.

306

THE ORDER OF LAKANDULA IS COMPOSED
OF THE FOLLOWING RANKS:

Grand Collar (Supremo) - Conferred upon
an individual who has suffered materially
for the preservation and defense of the
democratic way of life or of the territorial
integrity of the Republic of the Philippines;
or upon a former or incumbent head of State
and/or Government

Grand Cross (Bayani) - Conferred upon
an individual who has devoted his life to
the peaceful resolution of conflict; upon an
individual whose life is worthy of emulation
by the Filipino people; or upon a Crown
Prince, Vice President, Senate President,
Speaker of the House, Chief Justice or the
equivalent, foreign minister, or other official
of cabinet rank, Ambassador, Undersecretary,
Assistant Secretary, or other person of a rank
similar or equivalent to the foregoing

Grand Officer (Maringal na Pinuno) -
Conferred upon an individual who has
demonstrated a life-long dedication to the
political and civic welfare of society; or
upon a Charge d’affaires, e.p., Minister,
Minister Counselor, Consul General heading
a consular post, Executive Director, or other
person of a rank similar or equivalent to the
foregoing

Commander (Komandante) - Conferred
upon an individual who has demonstrated
exceptional deeds of dedication to the
political and civic welfare of society as a
whole; or upon a Charge d’affaires a.i.,
Counselor, First Secretary, Consul General in
the consular section of an Embassy, Consular
officer with a personal rank higher than

PHOTO: The Order of Lakandula pays homage
to pre-Hispanic and Muslim-Filipino designs. Its
composition for the Grand Collar, Grand Cross
and Grand Officer is silver gilt. For the ranks of
Commander, Officer, Member the medal is gilded
bronze or copper. Its ribbon is Philippine blue.

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

Second Secretary, Director, or other person of
a rank similar or equivalent to the foregoing.

Officer (Pinuno) - Conferred upon
an individual who has demonstrated
commendable deeds of dedication to the
political and civic welfare of society as a
whole; or upon a Second Secretary, Consul,
Assistant Director, or other person of a rank
similar or equivalent to the foregoing

Member (Kagawad) - Conferred upon an
individual who has demonstrated meritorious
deeds of dedication to the political and civic
welfare of society as a whole; or upon a Third
Secretary, Vice Consul, Attache, Principal
Assistant, or other person of a rank similar
or equivalent to the foregoing

In 2004, President Gloria MacapagaTArroyo
issued Executive Order No. 540 which created
a 7th rank for the Order of Lakandula. It
was called Champion for Life and the first
recipient of this rank was Boxer Manny
Pacquiao. It was last awarded in 2010.

307

likatuna

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

HISTORY

The Order of Sikatuna is an order of
diplomatic merit conferred upon individuals
who have rendered exceptional and
meritorious services to the Republic of
the Philippines; upon diplomats, officials,
and nationals of foreign states who have
rendered conspicuous service in fostering,
developing, and strengthening relations
between their country and the Philippines; or
upon personnel of the Department of Foreign
Affairs (DFA), both in the home office and
in the foreign service. Together with the
Philippine Legion of Honor and the Order of
Lakandula, the Order of Sikatuna is one of
the three senior honors of the Republic.

The Order of Sikatuna was established by
President Elpidio Quirino as the “Ancient
Order of Sikatuna,” through Executive
Order No. 571, dated February 27, 1953 |1] ,
in commemoration of the first treaty between
the Philippines and a foreign country. The

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

original four-rank composition (Raja, Lakan,
Maginoo, and Maharlika) was expanded by
Presidents Diosdado Macapagal through
Executive Order No. 24, s. 1962 [2] , and

308

by President Ferdinand E. Marcos through
Executive Order No. 174, s. 1 969d 31 In
2003, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
reformed the Philippine system of orders,
medals and decorations through Executive
Order No. 236, s. 2003 [4] , which established
the Elonors Code of the Philippines. The
Elonors Code renamed the Order as simply
the “Order of Sikatuna,” clarifying its
protocular standing and its ranks.

The Order of Sikatuna may also be awarded
by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs in the
name and by authority of the President.

DESCRIPTION OF THE RANK OF RAJA
OR GRAND COLLAR OF THE ORDER OF
SIKATUNA:

Designed by Gilbert Perez, the badge of
the Order of Sikatuna is a Maltese cross in
gilt and red and white enamel. The circular
center medallion of white enamel depicts
two arms, one gauntleted in European-style
and the other in tortoiseshell mail; both hold
daggers that drop blood into a cup resting
on a parchment scroll — a stylized rendition
of the Blood Compact made between
Raja Sikatuna of Bohol and the Spanish
conquistador Miguel Lopez de Legaspi in
1565. Above the two arms is the eight-rayed
Philippine sun. Philippine sea-lions emerge
above stylized blue waves on either gilt or
silver rays between the arms of the cross.
On the reverse of the badge is the seal of
the President of the Philippines. The badge
is suspended from a sampaguita wreath
in enamel and connected to a grand collar
of gilt silver. The two central links of the
collar at front and back feature the coat-of-
arms of the Republic of the Philippines, and

PHOTO: The Order of Sikatuna is an Order of
Diplomatic Merit conferred upon individuals
who have rendered exceptional and meritorious
services to the Republic of the Philippines, and
upon diplomats, officials and nationals of foreign
states who have rendered conspicuous services in
fostering, developing and strengthening relations
between their country and the Philippines, or
upon personnel of the Department of Foreign
Affairs (DFA), both in the Home Office and in
the Foreign Service. This badge and collar was
given to President Barack Obama of the United
States during his visit to the Philippines on April
28, 2014. Photo courtesy of the Presidential
Communications Development and Strategic
Planning Office.

eighteen further links feature alternately — in
gilt and blue, yellow and white enamel —
the Philippine sun emerging above stylized
waves, the Philippine sea-lion likewise
emerging above stylized waves, and the
baton of authority over a treaty parchment.

The badge and collar have a metallic
composition of 95% silver and 5% copper.
The ribbon of the Order of Sikatuna is red,
with yellow side stripes, thin white edges,
and a thin blue stripe through the center, and
is made of Philippine cotton hand-woven
by a cooperative foundation in Bontoc,
Mountain Province, in Northern Luzon. The
decoration also includes a miniature and

309

ribbon bar, which bears a grand sunburst
with two large demi-barrettes, and a grand
lapel rosette bearing two large gold demi-
barettes. The set is manufactured by the
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Mint, which
exclusively manufactures the Honors of the
Republic.

RANKS

Grand Collar (Raja) - Conferred upon a
former or incumbent head of state and/or of
government

Grand Cross (Datu) - The Grand Cross shall
have two (2) distinctions: (i) Gold (Katangiang
Ginto) and (ii) Silver (Katangiang Pilak). The
Grand Cross may be conferred upon a crown
prince, vice president, senate president,
speaker of the house, chief justice or the
equivalent; a foreign minister or other official
of cabinet rank, ambassador, undersecretary,
assistant secretary, or other person of a rank
similar or equivalent to the foregoing.

Grand Officer (Maringal na Lakan) -
Conferred upon a charge d’affaires, e.p.,
minister, minister counselor, consul general
heading a consular post, executive director, or
other person of a rank similar or equivalent
to the foregoing

Commander (Lakan) - Conferred upon
a charge d’affaires a.i., counselor, first
secretary, consul general in the consular
section of an embassy, consular officer with
a personal rank higher than second secretary,
director, or other person of a rank similar or
equivalent to the foregoing

Officer (Maginoo) - Conferred upon a second
secretary, consul, assistant director, or other
person of a rank similar or equivalent to the
foregoing. Before any Filipino government
official or employee may be entitled to the
award, he must have a minimum of six years
service in the government.

Member (Maharlika) - Conferred upon a
third secretary, vice consul, attache, principal
assistant, or other person of a rank similar or
equivalent to the foregoing.

ENDNOTES

[1J “Executive Order No. 571, s. 1953,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, February 27, 1953, http://
www. gov.ph/1953/ 02/2 7/ executi ve-
order-no-571/.

[2] “Executive Order No. 24, s. 1962,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, October 19, 1962, http://
www. go v.ph/1 962/1 0/1 9/ executi ve-
order-no-24-s-1962/

[3] “Executive Order No. 174, s. 1969,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, February 26, 1969, http://
www. go v.ph/1 96 9/ 02/26/ executi ve-
order-no-174-s-l 969/.

[4] “Executive Order No. 236, s. 2003,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, September 19, 2003, http://
www.gov.ph/2003/09/19/executive-
order-no-236/.

310

Philippine Legion of Honor

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, MARK BLANCO, AND JUSTIN GATUSLAO

INTRODUCTION

Established by virtue of Army Circular No.
60 on July 3, 1947, the Philippine Legion
of Honor is the oldest of the three Senior
Honors of the Republic. It is the Order
of Defense Merit of the Philippines. Its
highest rank, that of Chief Commander, is
the highest honor that the President of the
Philippines may grant an individual without
the concurrence of Congress.

The Philippine Legion of Honor is awarded
by the President of the Philippines. It may
also be awarded by the Secretary of National
Defense on behalf of the President.

Originally, the Philippine Legion of Honor had
four ranks, called degrees, with Legionnaire
as the lowest and Chief Commander as the

highest and most prestigious. However,
on September 19, 2003, the ranks of the
Philippine Legion of Honor were expanded
to six. This only applies to civilian awards,
as the Armed Lorces retains only four ranks,

311

called degrees, for the Philippine Legion of
Honor.

Recipients conferred the Philippine Legion
of Honor may be reawarded the same rank
or degree. In such cases, following military
practice, a bronze Anahaw leaf is conferred
each time the award is reconferred, in lieu of
an actual medal.

CRITERIA

Recipients of the Philippine Legion of Honor
may be Filipino citizens or foreigners. It is
awarded for meritorious service in military
or defense affairs or for contributions to the

preservation of the honor of the Republic of
the Philippines. It is conferred upon civilians
for military or defense service or for life
achievement in public service. In the military
it is conferred upon personnel who have
performed exceptionally in the conduct of
their duties.

RANKS

Civilian ranks were instituted by virtue
of Executive Order No. 236, s. 2003 and
Military Degrees were instituted by virtue of
AFPR G 131-053, s-86. The following table
shows the distinction between civilian ranks
and military degrees:

RANK/DEGREE

CONFERRED ON:

Chief Commander

Civilian: For life achievement in public service not otherwise
qualifying for the Quezon Service Cross; or upon a former or
incumbent head of state and/or of government.

Military: Chief of State, Prime Minister, Head of Government

Grand Commander

Civilian: For singular acts of service with a tangible impact on
the Philippine military sphere; or upon a Crown Prince, Vice
President, Senate President, Speaker of the House, Chief Justice
or the equivalent, foreign minister or other official of cabinet
rank; or upon an Ambassador, Undersecretary, Assistant
Secretary, or other person of a rank similar or equivalent to the
foregoing.

Grand Officer

Civilian: For acts of exemplary merit benefiting the Republic
of the Philippines; or upon a Charge d’affaires, e.p., Minister,
Minister Counselor, Consul General heading a consular
post, Executive Director, or other person of a rank similar or
equivalent to the foregoing.

312

RANK/DEGREE

CONFERRED ON:

Commander

Civilian: For acts of conspicuous merit benefiting the Republic
of the Philippines; or upon a Charge d’affaires, a.i., Counselor,
First Secretary, Consul General in the consular section of an
Embassy, Consular officer with a personal rank higher than
Second Secretary, Director, or other person of a rank similar or
equivalent to the foregoing.

Military: Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, Vice Chief of
Staff of the Armed Forces, Commanders of Major Services,
President of the Senate, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,
Heads of Departments

Officer

Civilian: For acts of commendable merit benefiting the
Republic of the Philippines; or upon a Second Secretary,
Consul, Assistant Director, or other person of a rank similar or
equivalent to the foregoing.

Military: Military Personnel not qualifying for a Distinguished
Service Star.

Legionnaire

Civilian: For acts of merit benefiting the Republic of the
Philippines; or upon a Third Secretary, Vice Consul, Attache,
Principal Assistant, or other person of a rank similar or
equivalent to the foregoing.

Military: Military Personnel for meritorious conduct but lesser
than the degree of Officer of more than the Military Medal of
Merit

313

ationa.

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

WHAT IS A NATIONAL ARTIST?

A National Artist is a Filipino citizen who
has been given the rank and title of National
Artist in recognition of his or her significant
contributions to the development of
Philippine arts and letters.

The rank and title of National Artist
is conferred by means of a Presidential
Proclamation. It recognizes excellence in
the fields of Music, Dance, Theater, Visual
Arts, Literature, Film and Broadcast Arts,
Architecture and Allied Arts, and Historical
Literature.

By virtue of Executive Order No. 451, s. 1997,
the National Artist for Historical Literature
was added to the Order od National Artists.

WHAT IS THE ORDER OF NATIONAL
ARTISTS?

Those who have been proclaimed National
Artists are given a Grand Collar symbolizing
their status. Recipients of this Grand Collar
make up the Order of National Artists. The

Order of National Artists (Orden ng Gawad
Pambansang Alagad ng Sining) is thus a
rank, a title, and a wearable award that
represents the highest national recognition
given to Filipinos who have made distinct
contributions in the field of arts and letters.
It is jointly administered by the National
Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA)
and the Cultural Center of the Philippines
(CCP), and is conferred by the President of
the Philippines upon recommendation by
both institutions.

As one of the Honors of the Philippines,
it embodies the nation’s highest ideals in
humanism and aesthetic expression through
the distinct achievements of individual
citizens. The Order of National Artists
shares similarities with orders, decorations,
and medals of other countries recognizing
contributions to their national culture such
as, the United States National Medal for the
Arts, and the Order of Culture of Japan.

According to the rules of the NCCA, the
Order of National Artists should be conferred
every three years.

314

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

THE INSIGNIA OF THE ORDER OF
NATIONAL ARTISTS

The insignia of the Order of the National
Artists is composed of a Grand Collar
featuring circular links portraying the arts,
and an eight-pointed conventionalized
sunburst suspended from a sampaguita
wreath in green and white enamel. The
central badge is a medallion divided into three
equal portions, red, white, and blue, recalling
the Philippine flag, with three stylized letter
Ks — the “KKK” stands for the CCP’s motto:
“katotohanan, kabutihan, at kagandahan”
(“the true, the good, and the beautiful”),
as coined by then first lady Mrs. Imelda
Romualdez Marcos, the CCP’s founder. The
composition of the Grand Collar is silver
gilt bronze. In place of a rosette there is an
enameled pin in the form of the insignia of
the order.

WHEN WAS THE ORDER OF NATIONAL
ARTISTS CREATED?

It was established by virtue of Presidential
Proclamation No. 1001, s. 1972, which
created the Award and Decoration of
National Artist, “to give appropriate
recognition and prestige to Filipinos who
have distinguished themselves and made
outstanding contributions to Philippine
arts and letters,” and which posthumously
conferred the award on the painter Fernando
Amorsolo, who had died earlier that year.

LEGAL BASIS OF THE ORDER OF
NATIONAL ARTISTS

Proclamation No. 1144, s. 1973 named
the CCP Board of Trustees as the National
Artist Awards Committee (or Secretariat).
Presidential Decree No. 208, s. 1973
reiterated the mandate of the CCP to
administer the National Artist Awards as
well as the privileges and honors to National
Artists.

Executive Order No. 236 s. 2003, otherwise
known as the Honors Code of the Philippines,
conferred additional prestige on the National
Artist Award by raising it to the level of a
Cultural Order, fourth in precedence among
the orders and decorations that comprise
the Honors of the Philippines, and equal
in rank to the Order of National Scientists
and the Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan. The
National Artist Award was thereby renamed
the Order of National Artists (Orden ng mga
Pambansang Alagad ng Sining). This reflected
the consensus among government cultural
agencies and the artistic community that the
highest possible international prestige and

315

recognition should be given our National
Artists. Section 5 of Executive Order No. 236
stated the President may confer the Order of
National Artists “upon the recommendation
of the CCP and the NCCA.”

Executive Order No. 435, s. 2005 amended
Section 5 of Executive Order No. 236, giving
the President the power to name National
Artists without need of a recommendation,
relegating the NCCA and the CCP to mere
advisory bodies that may or may not be
heeded. This expanded President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo’s flexibility to proclaim
National Artists at her discretion, which led
to the controversy of 2009 and the subsequent
intervention of the Supreme Court by issuing
a status quo ante order against the awardees
that year.

In May 2009, four recommendations were
sent to President Arroyo by the Secretariat.
President Arroyo issued proclamations
on July 2009 for three, excluding for one
nominee, Ramon P. Santos.

In addition, President Arroyo issued
proclamations for four individuals who were
not recommended, namely, Cecile Guidote-
Alvarez, Francisco T. Manosa, Magno
Jose J. Caparas, and Jose “Pitoy” Moreno.
These four artists have not been vetted and
deliberated upon by the Secretariat.

As a result, the majority of living national
artists (Almario, Lumbera, et. al.) filed a
petition questioning President Arroyo’s
abuse of her discretion by proclaiming as
national artists individuals (Guidote- Alvarez,
Caparas, Manosa, and Moreno) who have
not gone through the rigorous screening and

selection process of the NCCA and the CCP.
In July 2013, the Supreme Court, in the case
of Almario vs the Executive Secretary (GR
No. 189028, July 16, 2013), invalidated
President Arroyo’s proclamations of four
national artists. It decided that, as the source
of all honors, the President has the discretion
to reject or approve nominees. However,
the President does not have the discretion
to amend the list by adding names that did
not go through the NCCA-CCP process. The
discretion is confined to the names submitted
by the NCCA and CCP.

From 2009 until 2011, in the absence of
any resolution by the Supreme Court, the
Secretariat had the impression that they may
not process any future nominations. The
Order of the National Artists is supposed to
be proclaimed every three years.

When the Secretariat consulted the Office
of the Solicitor General, clarification was
provided. The Supreme Court’s status quo
ante order only applied to the batch of 2009
nominees. Therefore, upon the advice of the
Solicitor General, the Secretariat decided to
once more proceed with the process.

316

PROCESS OF NOMINATION AND CONFERMENT OF THE ORDER

The Order of National Art-
ists Secretariat (CCP/NCCA)
announces opening for
nominations.

£ A

The NCCA and CCP x
submit a list of /
recommendees ,
to the President /

NCCA and CCP receive nomi-
nations; screen
and deliberate.

The Order of National Artists
conferred during ceremonies
organized by the Secretariat.

The President issues a
proclamation conferring
the rank and title on
the recommendees.

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

CRITERIA FOR THE ORDER OF NATIONAL ARTISTS

1. Living artists who are Filipino citizens at
the time of nomination, as well as those
who died after the establishment of the
award in 1972 but were Filipino citizens
at the time of their death;

2. Artists who, through the content and
form of their works, have contributed in
building a Filipino sense of nationhood;

3. Artists who have pioneered in a mode of
creative expression or style, thus earning
distinction and making an impact on
succeeding generations of artists;

4. Artists who have created a substantial
and significant body of work and/or
consistently displayed excellence in the
practice of their art form thus enriching
artistic expression or style; and

317

5. Artists who enjoy broad acceptance

through:

• prestigious national and/or international
recognition, such as the Gawad CCP
Para sa Sining, CCP Thirteen Artists
Award and NCCA Alab ng Haraya;

• critical acclaim and/or reviews of their
works;

• respect and esteem from peers.

THOSE SUBMITTING NOMINATIONS FOR
NATIONAL ARTIST MUST SUBMIT THE
FOLLOWING:

• A cover letter from the nominating
organization. The cover letter shall be
accompanied by a Board Resolution
approving the nomination concerned
with the said resolution signed by the
organization President and duly certified
by the Board Secretary.

• A duly accomplished nomination form;

• A detailed curriculum vitae of the
nominee;

• A list of the nominee’s significant works
categorized according to the criteria;

• The latest photograph (color or black
and white) of the nominee, either 5” x
7” or 8”x 11”;

• Pertinent information materials on the
nominee’s significant works (on CDs,
VCDs and DVDs);

• Copies of published reviews; and

• Any other document that may be
required.

TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES:

The NATIONAL ARTIST AWARD

SECRETARIAT Office of the Artistic Director
Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas
Boulevard, 1300 Pasay City

The NATIONAL ARTIST AWARD

SECRETARIAT Office of the Deputy Executive
Director National Commission for Culture and
the Arts 633 General Luna Street, Intramuros,
Manila

A MEMBER OF THE ORDER OF NATIONAL
ARTISTS ARE GRANTED THE FOLLOWING
HONORS AND PRIVILEGES:

1. The rank and title of National Artist,
as proclaimed by the President of the
Philippines;

2. The insignia of a National Artist and a
citation;

3. A lifetime emolument and material and
physical benefits comparable in value to
those received by the highest officers of
the land such as:

a. a cash award of One Hundred Thousand
Pesos (PHP 100,000.00) net of taxes,
for living awardees;

b. a cash award of Seventy Five Thousand
Pesos (PHP 75,000.00) net of taxes, for
posthumous awardees, payable to legal
heir/s;

c. a monthly life pension, medical and
hospitalization benefits;

d. life insurance coverage for Awardees
who are still insurable;

318

e. a state funeral and burial at the Libingan
ng mga Bayani;

f. a place of honor, in line with protocular
precedence, at national state functions,
and recognition at cultural events.

SOURCE:

The NCCA’s National Artists of the
Philippines Guidelines. For more information
on Philippine arts and culture, please visit
www.ncca.gov.ph

APPENDIX: THE ROSTER OF NATIONAL ARTISTS

AWARDEE

DATE OF AWARD

CATEGORY

51. Ben Cabrera

2006

Visual Arts

52. Abdulmari Asia Imao

2006

Visual Arts

53. Dr. Bienvenido Lumbera

2006

Literature

54. Ramon Obusan (+)

2006

Dance

55. Fernando Poe Jr. (++)

2006

Film

56. Architect Ildefonso Santos, Jr. (+)

2006

Landscape

Architecture

57. Ramon Valera (++)

2006

Fashion Design

58. Manuel Conde* (++)

2009

Cinema

59. Lazaro A. Francisco* (++)

2009

Literature

60. Federico Aguilar Alcuaz* (+)

2009

Visual Arts

61. Alice Reyes

2014

Dance

62. Francisco V. Coching (++)

2014

Visual Arts

63. Cirilo F. Bautista

2014

Literature

64. Francisco F. Feliciano

2014

Music

65. Ramon P. Santos

2014

Music

66. Jose Maria V. Zaragoza (++)

2014

Architecture

LEGEND: (+) deceased; (++) posthumous conferment;

* declared valid by Supreme Court GR No. 189028

321

atioeal Scientists

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY

The National Academy of Science and
Technology (NAST) is the highest recognition
and advisory body on science and technology.
It is composed of outstanding scientists who
serve as a reservoir of competent scientific
and technological manpower for the country.

The 1973 Constitution stated that the
advancement of science shall have priority
in national development and that the
“State shall promote scientific research
and invention.” In order to implement
this constitutional mandate, Presidential
Decree (PD) No. 1003-A, s. 1976, created
the National Academy of Science and
Technology, the highest recognition and
advisory body on science and technology.

Executive Order (EO) No. 818, s. 1982,
mandated NAST to act as the advisory body
of the President of the Philippines and to the
Cabinet in matters concerning science and
technology in the Philippines. Furthermore,
the EO empowered the Academy to engage

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

in projects or programs designed to recognize
outstanding achievements in science to
promote scientific productivity.

322

THE ORDER OF NATIONAL SCIENTISTS

P.D. No. 1003-A intended to create a body
to recognize outstanding achievements in
science and technology as well as provide
meaningful incentives to those engaged in
scientific and technological research. In doing
so, it also created the distinction of National
Scientist, the highest honor given by the
President of the Republic of the Philippines
to a Filipino man or woman of science in
the Philippines who has made significant
contributions in one of the different fields of
science and technology. National Scientists
are recommended annually by NAST “for
distinguished individual or collaborative
achievement in science and/or technology”
and are accorded rank and title by the
President. According to P.D. No. 1003-A,
National Scientists “shall each be given a
gratuity in such amount to be fixed by the
Academy and shall be entitled to other
privileges as are enjoyed by the ‘National
Artists’.”

In 2003, Executive Order No. 236 was signed
by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. It
codified the system of Philippine Orders and
State Decorations, and elevated the standing
of the National Scientists into the Order of
National Scientists, with the Order defined
as such:

... an award that grants membership in an
exclusive association of honored individuals,
and which by tradition carries with it
distinctive insignia to be worn by recipients

Since 1978, the Presidents of the Philippines
have conferred the rank and title of National
Scientist on 35 Filipinos, 14 of whom are still
living.

P.D. No. 1003-A defines a scientist as an
individual who has earned a doctoral degree
in any field of the sciences in an accredited
university, and has demonstrated and
earned distinction in independent research
or significant innovative achievement in
the basic and applied sciences, including
agricultural, engineering, medical sciences,
and mathematics, as manifested by his/her
published works in recognized scientific and
technical journals. The decree stated however
that “in highly meritorious and extremely
exceptional cases the foregoing doctoral
degree requirement may be waived.”

THE ORDER OF NATIONAL SOCIAL
SCIENTISTS

The Honors Code of 2003 also created the
Order of National Social Scientists, grouped
and ranked with the Order of National
Scientists and the Order of National Artists
as the Order of Artistic, Cultural, and
Scientific Merit of the Republic. This in effect
removed social scientists under the purview
of the Order of National Scientists. However,
guidelines and its insignia have yet to be
created.

323

PROCESS OF NAMING A NATIONAL SCIENTIST

Members of NAST
nominate scientists
for consideration

Members of NAST vote on the
names to be recommended
to the President

NAST deliberates on
the nominations

• A 60% vote of all the
members of NAST is
needed for a name to be
recommended.

• Only 10 names per
year may be submitted
for consideration for the
Order of National
Scientists.

President issues a
Presidential Proclamation
naming the National Scientist

The Order of National
Scientists is conferred
during ceremonies

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

324

APPENDIX: THE ROSTER OF NATIONAL SCIENTISTS

AWARDEE

YEAR

CONFERRED

FIELD OF SPECIALIZATION

1. Juan S. Salcedo, Jr., M.D. (+)

1978

Nutrition and Public Flealth

2. Alfredo C. Santos, Dr.phil. (+)

1978

Physical Chemistry

3. Gregorio Y. Zara, D.Sc. (+)

1978

Engineering and Inventions

4. Fe Del Mundo, M.D. (+)

1980

Pediatrics

5. Eduardo A. Quisumbing, Ph.D. (+)

1980

Plant Taxonomy, Systematics,
and Morphology

6. Geminiano T. de Ocampo, Ph.D. (+)

1982

Ophthalmology

7. Casimiro V. del Rosario, Ph.D (+)

1982

Physics, Astronomy, and
Meteorology

8. Gregorio T. Velasquez, Ph.D. (+)

1982

Phycology

9. Francisco M. Fronda, Ph.D. (+)

1983

Animal Husbandry

10. Francisco O. Santos, Ph.D. (++)

1983

Human Nutrition and
Agricultural Chemistry

11. Carmen C. Velasquez, Ph.D. (+)

1983

Parasitology

12. Teodoro A. Agoncillo, Litt.D. (++)

1985

Philippine History

13. Encarnacion A. Alzona, Ph.D. (+)

1985

Philippine History

14. Hilario D. G. Lara, M.D., Dr. P.H. (+)

1985

Public Health

15. Julian A. Banzon, Ph.D. (+)

1986

Chemistry

16. Dioscoro L. Umali, Ph.D. (+)

1986

Agriculture and Rural
Development

17. Luz Oliveros-Belardo, Ph.D. (+)

1987

Phytochemistry

18. Jose Encarnacion Jr., Ph.D. (+)

1987

Economics

19. Alfredo V. Lagmay, Ph.D. (+)

1988

Experimental Psychology

20. Paolo C. Campos, M.D. (+)

1989

Nuclear Medicine

21. Pedro B. Escuro, Ph.D. (+)

1994

Genetics and Plant Breeding

22. Clara Y. Lim-Sylianco, Ph.D. (+)

1994

Biochemistry and Organic
Chemistry

23. Dolores A. Ramirez, Ph.D.

1998

Biochemical Genetics and
Cytogenetics

LEGEND: (+) deceased; (++) posthumous conferment;

325

AWARDEE

YEAR

CONFERRED

FIELD OF SPECIALIZATION

24. Jose R. Velasco, Ph.D. (+)

1998

Plant Physiology

25. Gelia T. Castillo, Ph.D.

1999

Rural Sociology

26. Bienvenido O. Juliano, Ph.D.

2000

Organic Chemistry

27. Clare R. Baltazar, Ph.D.

2001

Systematic Entomology

28. Benito S. Vergara, Ph.D.

2001

Plant Physiology

29. Onofre D. Corpuz, Ph.D. (+)

2004

Political Economics and
Government

30. Ricardo M. Lantican, Ph.D.

2005

Plant Breeding

31. Lourdes J. Cruz, Ph.D.

2006

Marine Biology

32. Teodulo M. Topacio

2008

Veterinary Medicine

33. Mercedes B. Concepcion

2010

Demography

34. Ernesto O. Domingo

2010

Infectious Diseases

35. Perla D. Santos-Ocampo (+)

2010

Pediatrics

36. Raul V. Fabella

2011

Economics

37. Bienvenido F. Nebres, S.J.

2011

Mathematics

38. Angel C. Alcala, Ph.D.

2014

Biological Sciences

39. Ramon C. Barba, Ph.D.

2014

Horticulture

40. Gavino C. Trono, PhD

2014

Marine Biology

41. Edgardo D. Gomez, PhD

2014

Marine Biology

LEGEND: (+) deceased; (++) posthumous conferment;

326

Gawad sa

Manlilikha mg Bayam

MANUEL L. QUEZON Ml AND COLINE ESTHER CARDENO

INTRODUCTION

The Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan, or the
National Living Treasures Award, is conferred
on Filipinos who are at the forefront of the
practice, preservation, and promotion of the
nation’s traditional folk arts.

The State’s recognition of such sociocultural
contributions was formalized in 1992,
through Republic Act No. 7355, the
Manlilikha ng Bayan Act. The National
Commission for the Culture and the Arts
oversees its implementation.

The main objective of the award is to honor
and support traditional folk artists and to
see to it that that their skills and crafts are
preserved. The award is tied with a program
that ensures the transfer of their skills to new
generations and the promotion of the craft

both locally and internationally. 111 In 2014,
the Senate of the Philippines adopted Senate
Resolution No. 765 aimed at recognizing
the accomplishments of the country’s living
treasures. 121

EMBLEM

The award logo is a representation of the
human form used in traditional cloth. Below
the logo is the phrase “Manlilikha ng Bayan”
written in Baybayin, an ancient Filipino script
used in the Philippines in the 16th century. 131

CRITERIA

1. Should be a Filipino citizen or group
of citizens belonging to an indigenous /
traditional cultural community anywhere
in the Philippines, engaged in Filipino
traditional art in the following categories:

327

folk architecture, maritime transport,
weaving, carving, performing arts, literature,
graphic and plastic arts, ornament, textile
or fiber art, pottery and other artistic
expressions of traditional culture;

2. Should have been engaged in the tradition
and craft for a significant period of time
with at least 50 years of existence and
documentation;

3. Should have produced and performed of
artistic, distinctive, and superior quality;

4. Should possess mastery of the tools and
materials that are needed for the art and must
have a reputation for being an art master and
craft maker in the community where he/she
belongs;

5. Should have passed on and/or will pass
on the traditional crafts and skills to other
members of the community by virtue of
teaching;

6. In case when a Manlilikha ng Bayan
candidate is incapable of teaching further
his/her craft and skill due to age or infirmity;

a. He/she should have created a significant
body of work and has contributed to the
development of the tradition and craft

b. He/she should have played a role in the
preservation and revitalization of the
artistic tradition in the community.

c. He/she has been recognized as a
master of his/her craft and admired for
his character and integrity in his/her
community. 141

PROCESS

The Panel. The Gawad sa Manlilikha ng
Bayan is administered by a committee, which
is assisted by an ad hoc panel of experts. The
panel is composed of a representative from
each of the committees of the Subcommission
on Cultural Communities and Traditional
Arts, such as the Office of the Muslim
Affairs (OMA), the National Commission
on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), and other
appropriate institutions. The ad hoc panel of
reviewers is composed of five members of the
Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan Committee
and four individuals identified by the
Committee among scholars, practitioners,
and experts in the traditional art.

The Nominations. Nominations can come
from the members of the ad hoc panel of
experts, the sub-commissions on cultural
communities and traditional arts, government
and private institutions, universities, and
other persons knowledgeable of any of
the categories: folk architecture, maritime
transport, weaving, carving, performing arts,
literature, graphic and plastic arts, ornament,
textile and fiber art, pottery, and other artistic
expressions of traditional culture.

The Screening. The ad hoc search committees
is deployed to various priority areas in the
country to conduct searches and document
the candidates’ art/craft. The ad hoc panel
of reviewers review the qualifications of the
candidates and submit their recommendations
to the National Commission for the Culture
and the Arts Board of Commissioners. Once
selected, the President of the Philippines
confers the awardees in a public ceremony in
Malacanan Palace. [S1

328

AWARDS AND INCENTIVES

1 . The awardee receives a specially designed
medallion/plaque, with a duplicate set
that should be donated and displayed to a
provincial museum or the largest cultural
center in the awardee’s community.

2. The awardee is given an initial grant of
PHP 100,000.00 and a PHP 14,000.00
lifetime stipend per month.

3. The awardee is granted a maximum
cumulative amount of PHP 750,000.00
medical and hospitalization benefits as well
as funeral assistance similar as those received
by the National Artists. [6]

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

329

APPENDIX: THE ROSTER OF NATIONAL LIVING TREASUURES AWARDEES

AWARDEE

ART/CRAFT

DATE OF
AWARD

Ginaw Bilog [7] (f 2003)
Artist and Poet
Mansalay, Oriental Mindoro

Poetry (Ambahan)

1993

Masino Intaray [8] (f 2013)
Musician and Epic Chanter
Brookes Point, Palawan

Poetry (Kulilal and Bagit)
Music (Basal/Gong)

1993

Samaon Sulaiman [9] (f 2011)
Musician

Mama sa Pano, Maguindanao

Music (Kutyapi)

1993

Lang Dulay [101

Textile Weaver

Lake Sebu, South Cotabato

Weaving (T’nalak)

1998

Salinta Monon [11] (f 2009)
Weaver

Bansalan, Davao del Sur

Weaving (Abaca - ikat/Inabal)

1998

Alonzo Saclag 1121
Musician and dancer
Lubugan, Kalinga Province

Music and Dance (Kalinga)

2000

Lrederico Caballero 1131
Epic Chanter
Sulod-Bukidnon, Iloilo

Poetry/Epic Chant (Sugidanon)

2000

Uwang Ahadas [14]
Musician
Lamitan, Basilan

Music (Yakan specifically
Kulintang, kwitangan kayu,
gabbang, agung, and tuntungan)

2000

Darhata Sawabi 1151 (f 2005)

Weaver

Parang, Sulu

Weaving (Pis Syabit)

2004

330

AWARDEE

ART/CRAFT

DATE OF
AWARD

Eduardo Mutuc [16]
Metalsmith/Metal sculptor
Apalit, Pampanga

Metalwork (Bronze and Silver)

2004

Haja Amina Appi 1171 (f 2013)
Weaver

Tandubas, Tawi-Tawi

Weaving (Mat)

2004

Teofilo Garcia 1181
Casque Maker
San Quintin, Abra

Casque Making (Tabungaw)

2012

Magdalena Gamayo [19]
Master Weaver
Pinili, Ilocos Norte

Weaving (Inabel)

2012

LEGEND: (+) deceased; (++) posthumous conferment;

ENDNOTES

[1 J “National Living Treasures Guidelines,”
National Commission for Culture and
the Arts, last modified 2011, accessed
November 27, 2014, http://www.ncca.
gov.ph/about-ncca/org-awards/org-
awards-gamaba-guidelines.php

[2] “Senate commends Gawad sa

Manlilikha ng Bayan Awardees,”

Senate of the Philippines, last modified
September 24, 2014, accessed
November 2014, https://www.senate.
gov.ph/press_release/20 1 4/0924_prib 1 .
asp

[3] Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan (Manila:

NCCA, 2012): 37.

[4] 2014 GAMABA nomination form.

[5] Republic Act No. 7355, Official Gazette

of the Republic of the Philippines,
accessed November 27, 2014, http://
www.gov.ph/1992/04/03/republic-act-
no-7355/.

[6] Republic Act no. 7355, Official Gazette

of the Republic of the Philippines,
last modified April 3, 1992, accessed
November 27, 2014, http://www.gov.
ph/1 992/04/03/republic-act-no-7355/

[7] “Manlilikha ng Bayan,” in Pinagmulan:

Enumerations from the Philippine
Inventory of Intangible Cultural
Heritage, ed. Jesus T. Peralta (Manila:
National Commission for Culture and
the Arts, 2013), 57.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

331

[10J Jan Mariciris Tobias “Lang Dulay,”
in Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan:
National Living Treasures Awards
(Manila: National Commission for
Culture and the Arts, 1998), 8.

[1 1 J Jan Maricris Tobias, “Salinta Monon,”
in Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan:
National Living Treasures Awards
(Manila: National Commission for
Culture and the Arts, 1998), 10.

[12] “Manlilikha ng Bayan,” in Pinagmulan,
57.

[13] Ibid., 56.

[14] Ibid.

[15] “Weaving Treasured Tapestries,”
in Gawad sa Manlilikha ng Bayan
(Manila: National Commission for
Culture and the Arts, 2004).

[16] “Embossing Life’s Designs,” in Gawad
sa Manlilikha ng Bayan (Manila:
National Commission for Culture and
the Arts, 2004).

[17] “Weaver of Rainbows,” in Gawad
sa Manlilikha ng Bayan (Manila:
National Commission for Culture and
the Arts, 2004).

[18] Jan Maricris Tobias, “Planting
Gourd, Harvesting Art,” in Gawad sa
Manlilikha ng Bayan (Manila: NCCA,
2012), 12-17.

[19] Jan Maricris Tobias, “A Life Designed,
An Art Unfurled,” in Gawad sa
Manlilikha ng Bayan (Manila: NCCA,
2012), 29-31.

332

Gawad Mabini

MANUEL L. QUEZON III

The Gawad Mabini is conferred on Filipinos
who have rendered distinguished foreign
service, or helped promote the interests and
prestige of the Philippines abroad. It was
established by virtue of Presidential Decree
No. 490, s. 1974 in honor of Apolinario
Mabini, the first Secretary of Foreign Affairs
in the First Republic of the Philippines. It
was codified in 2003 by virtue of the Honors
Code of the Philippines.

According to the Implementing Rules and
Regulations of the Honors Code, the Gawad
Mabini shall be conferred for

• an individual act of merit, such as:
contributing substantially to the
evacuation of Philippine nationals from
a danger zone;

• individual acts of merit in the provision
of consular services or the protection of
Philippine nationals;

• exemplary performance in an
international negotiation or mission; and

• other individual acts of merit reflective
of the finest traditions of the Foreign
Service.

WHO MAY BE CONFERRED THE GAWAD
MABINI?

• Personnel of the Department of Foreign
Affairs, both in the Home Office and in
the Foreign Service, who have served at
least a minimum of four years;

• Filipinos who have rendered distinguished
service or promoted the interests of the
Republic of the Philippines at home and
abroad.

It may also be conferred ad diploma 111 on
those who provided substantive support
to a foreign visit by the President or who
contributed concretely to the successful
preparation and/or hosting by the Philippines
of a major international event. In this context
the Gawad Mabini would be conferred for
events at the level equivalent of the Vice
President and above.

THE AWARD IS COMPOSED OF THREE
RANKS:

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong) -
Conferred upon a former or incumbent
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Chief of

333

Photo courtesy of the National Historical
Commission of the Philippines.

Mission, Cabinet member, or other high
official who heads a Philippine delegation
to an important international conference on
a ministerial level, and, as a result thereof,
has made substantive contributions to public
interest and public welfare.

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo) - Conferred
upon an officer with a rank between career
minister to Foreign Service Officer class IV,
or upon personnel of a government agency
who serves as an Attache in a Foreign Service
establishment, as recommended by the Chief
of Mission or the Principal Officer of the
post served, as the case may be, or by the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, in the case of
personnel in the Flome Office.

Member (Kasugo) - Conferred upon a
staff officer or employee of the DFA, as
recommended by the Chief of Mission or the

Principal Officer of the post served, as the case
may be, or by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs,
in the case of personnel in the Home Office.

INSIGNIA OF THE GAWAD MABINI

The insignia of the Gawad Mabini is a
stylized Romanian Cross with a red triangle
in the center with stars on each corner and
which bears the image of Apolinario Mabini.
It is surrounded by three stylized letter Ks.
The composition of the medal for a Grand
Cross is silver gilt, while, for Commander
and Member, is gilded bronze or copper. The
ribbon is composed of three equal stripes,
red, yellow, and blue, evoking the colors of
the Philippine flag.

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

PROCESS OF NOMINATION AND
CONFERMENT

The Department of Foreign Affairs
recommends the conferment of the Gawad
Mabini on individuals.

The Gawad Mabini may be conferred by the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs in the name and
by authority of the President.

334

ROSTER OF AWARDEES

NAME

RANK

YEAR

Imelda Romualdez Marcos

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1978

Leon Ma. Guerrero

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1982

Aide Fune

Member (Kasugo)

1993

Bahnarim Abu Guinomla

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1993

Leon Rodion Roxas

Member (Kasugo)

1993

Luz Palacios

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1993

Marciano A. Paynor Jr.

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1993

Petronilo de la Cruz

Member (Kasugo)

1993

Renato Villapando

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1993

Romulo Buhat

Member (Kasugo)

1993

Rosendo Crucillo

Member (Kasugo)

1993

Cristina Ortega

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1994

Diosdado Macapagal

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1994

335

Hortencio Brillantes

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1994

Mariano Dumi

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1994

Melchor P. Aquino

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1994

Melita Sta. Maria

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1994

* Narciso R. Ramos

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1994

Narciso Reyes

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1994

Ricardo Andaya

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

1994

Arturo Tolentino

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1995

Leticia Ramos-Shahani

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1995

Leandro Verceles

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1996

Salvador Laurel

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1996

Ruben Espedilla

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1997

* Delfin Garcia

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1998

Manuel Yan

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1998

* Modesto Farolan

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1998

Rafael Ileto

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1998

Leonides Caday

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

1999

Federico Macaranas

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Felipe Mabilangan Jr.

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Mamintal Tamano

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Manuel Collantes

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Rora Navarro-Tolentino

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Samuel Ramel

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Tomas Padilla

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2001

Catherine P. Maceda

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2003

Cotawato M. Arimao

Member (Kasugo)

2003

Fortunato D. Oblena

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2003

Grace R. Princesa

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2003

Jasmin P. Aragon

Member (Kasugo)

2003

Joel Nunag

Member (Kasugo)

2003

Philip M. Figueroa

Member (Kasugo)

2003

Ronald M. Joves

Member (Kasugo)

2003

336

Roy Cimatu

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2003

Carlos P. Romulo

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2005

Aian Caringal

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Benito Valeriano

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Brian Dexter Lao

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Carlos Sorreta

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Claro Cristobal

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Dennis Lepatan

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Domingo T. Lucenario

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Edwin Mendoza

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Erlinda Basilio

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Esteban Cornejos

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Evan Garcia

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Ezzedin Tago

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Gen. Honesto Lactao

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Jason Jovencio Anasarias

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Jerril Santos

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Jocelyn Batoon-Garcia

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Leah Victoria Rodriguez

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Lorena Joy Banagodos

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Luis T. Cruz

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Ma. Angelina M. Sta. Catalina

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Ma. Teresa Lepatan

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Marciano A. Paynor Jr.

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Maria Andrelita Austria

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Maria Elena Algabre-Misrahi

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Mary Ann Padua

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Minda Calaguian Cruz

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Orontes Castro

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Ramon Gaspar

Member (Kasugo)

2007

Raymond Balatbat

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Robert Borje

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

337

Romeo Manalo

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2007

Sylvia Marasigan

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Theresa Dizon-de Vega

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Teresita Daza

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2007

Donna Celeste

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2010

Eleanor L. Jaucian

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2010

Fernando V. Beup Jr.

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2010

Flerida Ann Camille P. Mayo

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2010

Flenry S. Bensurto

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2010

Junaid Ali

Member (Kasugo)

2010

Rafael E. Seguis

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2013

Maria Rowena Mendoza Sanchez

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2013

Teresita V.G. Barsana

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2013

Nestor N. Padalhin

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2013

Gilberto G.B. Asuque

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2013

Raul S. Hernandez

Grand Cross (Dakilang Kamanong)

2013

Patrick A. Chuasoto

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Marciano R. De Borja

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Enrico T. Fos

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Rex Arvin T. Malimban

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Christine Queenie C. Mangunay

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Alicia D. Santos

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Edward C. Yulo

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2013

Jerome F. Friaz

Member (Kasugo)

2013

Merle B. Puruganan

Member (Kasugo)

2013

Aquino M. Sultan

Member (Kasugo)

2013

Doris Magsaysay-Ho

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2015

Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2015

Tony Tan Caktiong

Commander (Dakilang Kasugo)

2016

[1] When an honor is conferred ad diploma, only the diploma is presented to the recipient.
The recipients of awards and diploma may, at their discretion, procure the insignia on their
own account.

338

Order of the Golden Heart

(ORDEN NG GINTONG PUSO)

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND COLINE ESTHER CARDENO

The Order of the Golden Heart (Orden ng
Gintong Puso) is an award conferred by the
President on individuals or organizations,
Filipino or of foreign nationality, who have
rendered distinguished service; or have
given noteworthy monetary, material aid,
or encouragement for the improvement

of social, economic, and moral conditions
of the Filipino masses, 111 especially in the
rural areas. 121 The award was instituted
by President Ramon Magsaysay, through
Executive Order No. 40-A of 1954, as the
Golden Heart Presidential Award. 131

THE GOLDEN HEART MEDAL 151

Obverse: Two hands and golden heart over
the inscription Manum tuam apervit inope, [6]
which is a Latin interpretation of Proverbs
31:20, “She hath opened her heart to the
needy and stretched forth her hands to the
poor.”

Reverse: Inscription: The / Golden Heart /
Presidential Award. Presidential seal.

Ribbon: Blue-white-red for men; women’s
award designed to be worn as breast pin
without ribbon or as a pendant to a chain.

Metal: Bronze, oval, 40 x 50 mm.

339

RANKS ' 41

RANK

CONFERRED ON:

Grand Collar
(Maringal na
Kuwintas)

Conferred upon a former or an incumbent head of state and/or
government

Grand Cross
(Maringal na Krus)

Conferred upon a Crown Prince, Vice President, Senate President,
Speaker of the House, Chief Justice or the equivalent, Foreign
Minister or other official of cabinet rank; or upon an Commander
Ambassador, Undersecretary, Assistant Secretary, or other person of
a rank similar or equivalent to the foregoing

Grand Officer
(Maringal na
Pinuno)

Conferred upon a Charge d’affaires, e.p., Minister, Minister
Counselor, Consul General heading a consular post, Executive
Director, or other person of a rank similar or equivalent to the
foregoing

Commander

(Komandante)

Charge d’affaires, a.i., Counselor, First Secretary, Consul General
in the consular section of an Embassy, Consular officer with a
personal rank higher than Second Secretary, Director, or other
person of a rank similar or equivalent to the foregoing

Officer (Pinuno)

Conferred upon a Second Secretary, Consul, Assistant Director, or
other person of a rank similar or equivalent to the foregoing

Member

(Kagawad)

Conferred upon a Third Secretary, Vice Consul, Attache, Principal
Assistant, or other person of a rank similar or equivalent to the
foregoing

ENDNOTES

w “Executive Order No. 40-A, s. 1954,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, June 21, 1954, http://www.
gov.ph/1954/06/21/executive-order-no-
40-a/

[2] Aldo Basso, Coins, Medals, and Tokens
of the Philippines (Menlo Park, CA:
Chenby Publishers, 1968), 129.

131 “Executive Order No. 40-A, s. 1954,”
http://www.gov.ph/1954/06/21/
executive- order-no-40-a/

m “Executive Order No. 236, s. 2003,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, http://www.gov.
ph/2003/09/1 9/executive- order-
no-236/

[s] Basso, Coins, Medals, and Tokens, 129.

[6] “Executive Order No. 40-A, s. 1954,”
http://www.gov.ph/1954/06/21/
executive- order-no-40-a-s-1954/

340

The Presentation of
Credentials to the
President by the
Ambassadors to the
Philippines

MANUEL L. QUEZON III AND MARK BLANCO

To begin their tour of duty, every new
ambassador to the Philippines goes through
an official ceremony called the Presentation
of Credentials to the President of the
Philippines. This ceremony is a diplomatic
requirement in which the Philippine
government formally recognizes an
ambassador as the official representative of
his or her country. During the ceremony, the
new ambassador presents to the President of
the Philippines a document called a “letter
of credence,” which accredits him or her to
deal with the Philippine government in a
diplomatic capacity, with appropriate rank.

There are different types of ambassadors.
A nonresident ambassador represents more
than one country. An ambassador-at-large is
assigned to operate within a specific region,
or represent organizations such as the United

Nations and the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations. More commonly known is
the resident ambassador, tasked to represent
his or her country.

In all cases, ambassadors present their
credentials personally to the President in
his capacity as head of state. However,
nonresident ambassadors and the
ambassadors-at-large mainly present their
credentials during less formal ceremonies that
do away with the traditional military honors
and flourishes. The resident ambassadors
present their credentials in the most formal
way, typically with honors on par with a
visiting head of state or government. Below is
a diagram of the procedures and protocol as
established during the Third Republic (1946-
1973), adopted from the late Ambassador
Luis Moreno Salcedo’s A Guide to Protocol,

341

published in 1959. The protocol of that era
remains the basis of these ceremonies to this
day.

EXCERPT FROM A GUIDE TO PROTOCOL BY
AMBASSADOR LUIS MORENO SALCEDO:

The Chief of Protocol informs the
Ambassador of the day and time when he
will be received by the President.

Shortly before the hour indicated, the Chief
of Protocol, accompanied by the Junior
Aide to the President, proceeds to the
Ambassador’s residence in the President’s
car, with two motorcycle escorts and other
cars for the members of the Ambassador’s
staff. In the automobile, the Junior Aide sits
to the left of the Chief of Protocol. The Chief
of Protocol and the Aide are met at the door
of the Embassy by a diplomatic officer who
accompanies them to the drawing room.
Here the Ambassador receives them and
presents the officials of his staff.

The Ambassador and the member of his staff
are in uniform, with decorations, when this
is allowed by their regulations. Otherwise,
they may wear ordinary suits. Not more than
six members of the diplomatic staff usually
accompany the Ambassador.

The party proceeds to Malacanang in the
following order:

• The members of the Embassy staff
occupy the cars immediately preceded
by the motorcycle escorts, in the reverse
order of their precedence. Hence, the
lowest ranking officers occupy the car
following the motorcycle escorts and the

highest ranking officers occupy the car
immediately preceding the President’s
automobile.

• The Ambassador, the Chief of Protocol
and the Junior Aide to the President sit
in the President’s car.

• In the President’s automobile, the
Ambassador is seated to the right of the
Chief of Protocol, with the Junior Aide
to the President seated on the folding
seat in front of the Chief of Protocol.
For this purpose, the Chief of Protocol
goes in first and occupies the left end
of the rear seat of the automobile. The
Ambassador then steps in and occupies
the right side of the rear seat. The Junior
Aide goes around the automobile and
occupies his seat by passing through the
left rear door.

The Reception Ceremonies. Upon arriving
at Malacanang, the Ambassador’s staff is
led by an officer of the Presidential Guards
to one side of the main entrance, outside
the chapel. The Ambassador stands in front
of his staff, facing the military band. He is
flanked by the Chief of Protocol to his right
and the Junior Aide to his left. A unit of the
Presidential Guards then presents arms and
the band plays the National Anthem of the
Ambassador’s country.

At the conclusion of the playing of the
anthem, the Ambassador, followed by his
staff, ascends the staircase of Malacanang.
They are met at the head of the staircase
by the Senior Aide to the President. At this
point, the chandeliers in the Reception Hall
are simultaneously lighted.

342

The Senior Aide is presented
to the Ambassador and
the party proceeds to the
Reception Hall where they
are arranged as follows: The
Ambassador, flanked on his
right by the Chief of Protocol,
and on his left by the Senior
Aide, stands in front of the
table in the center of the
Hall. Behind them, and to
their right, the members of
the Ambassador’s staff are
arranged in the order of their
precedence by the Ceremonial
Officer.

Presentation of Credentials of
Resident Ambassadors

From “A Guide to Protocol” by Luis Moreno Salceno

♦ 1959 ♦

National Colors

Presidential Standard

In the Ceremonial Hall, the
President stands at the end
of the Hall, beneath and to
the rear of the last chandelier.

One foot behind and two feet
to his right is the Secretary of
Foreign Affairs. Two feet to
his left and one foot behind
is the Executive Secretary.

Between the latter and the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs is
the place of the Senior Aide.

The Undersecretary of Foreign
Affairs is one foot behind and
two feet to the right of the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs,
while one foot to the left and
two feet behind the Executive
Secretary is the Malacanang
Protocol Officer. Approximately five feet
behind the President, and to his right and left,
are the national colors and the presidential
standard respectively. They are set about ten
feet apart.

LEGEND

1 The President

2 Ambassador or minister

3 Secretary of Foreign Affairs

4 Executive Secretary

5 Senior Aide

6 Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs

7 The Chief of Protocol

8 Presidential Protocol

9 The Ceremonial Officer
10-12 Senior staff members of
Embassy or Legation

13-15 Other aides

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and
Strategic Planning Office.

The President and his accompanying officials
are therefore arranged as follows:

The Senior Aide withdraws from the
Reception Hall to announce to the President

343

the Ambassador’s arrival, and to inquire if
the President is ready to receive him. As soon
as the President is ready, the Senior Aide
returns and informs the Chief of Protocol
that the President will be pleased to receive
the Ambassador.

The curtains separating the Ceremonial Hall
from the Reception Hall are drawn aside by
the attendants, and the chandeliers in the
Ceremonial Hall are likewise lighted. The
Ambassador, with the Chief of Protocol to
his right and the Senior Aide to his left, enters
the South Room. Inside the entrance, they
pause and bow slightly to the President. They
continue walking towards the President and
stop when approximately six feet in front
of him. The Senior Aide, however, continues
advancing and takes his position behind
the President and between the Secretary of
Foreign Affairs and the Executive Secretary.
In the meantime, the Ceremonial Officer of
the Foreign Office escorts the members of
the Ambassador’s staff to the Ceremonial
Hall. They stand, single file, at a distance
sufficiently near to witness the whole
ceremony, but far enough so as not to divert
attention from the Ambassador.

The Chief of Protocol Presents the
Ambassador as follows:

Mr. President:

I have the honor to present the Ambassador

Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of (name

of country) to the Republic of the Philippines,

His Excellency (name of Ambassador).

When the Ambassador comes from a
Spanish-speaking country, the ceremonies

are conducted in Spanish. In this case, the
presentation is as follows:

Senor Presidente:

Cabeme ei honor de presentar al Embajador
Extraordinario y Plenipotenciario de (nombre
del pais) a la Republica de Filipinas, el
Excelentisimo senor don (nombre del
Embajador).

The Ambassador steps forward and hands
to the President the Letter of Recall of his
predecessor, as well as his own Letter of
Credence. Without breaking the seals, the
President passes the Letters to the Secretary
of Foreign Affairs, who in turn hands them
to the Undersecretary. The Ambassador then
steps back and reads his address.

Reproduced below is the speech of Dr.
Alexander A. Maramis, Ambassador
Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of
Indonesia to the Philippines, on the occasion
of the presentation of his credentials on
February 28, 1950.

Mr. President:

When the riptide of colonialism hit Asia in
the sixteenth century, not only did it enslave
the peoples of Indonesia and the Philippines,
but it also sundered the close links of blood,
culture and unity which had for so long
welded us together. For the ensuing three
hundred and fifty years we remained divided,
virtual strangers hardly aware of each other's
existence.

Today the onward march of freedom in
Asia has brought about our independence

344

and, with it, an awareness of the existence
of old friends. Forgotten memories are
being revived, the old fires of friendship are
beginning to burn with increased vigour. The
freedom of Indonesia, towards which the
Philippines contributed in such rich measure,
has restored old friends to the family circle,
and the exchange of diplomatic missions
which we are consummating bears evidence
of the moral union we have achieved.

There is pressing need today for close
collaboration between the free countries of
South East Asia. Indonesia, in concert with her
neighbours, is ready and willing to contribute
her share towards furthering economic,
cultural and political understanding in this
part of the world in a spirit of friendship for all
and malice towards none. In the challenging
task of creating a better world we shall
participate wholeheartedly, without playing
favourites.

To me has fallen the signal honour of
being Indonesia's first ambassador to the
Philippines, and it will be my constant
endeavour to keep full to the brim the great
reservoir of goodwill towards Indonesia
which exist in this country.

The President replied as follows:

Mr. Ambassador:

It is with deep personal pleasure as well
as fraternal pride that I welcome you as
the first ambassador extraordinary and
plenipotentiary of the Republic of the United
States of Indonesia to the Philippines. To my
countrymen and myself, you are more than
the accredited representative here of a great

neighboring republic. Your presence among
us today in your high diplomatic capacity
is the first tangible mark of the free and
sovereign status which we have at one time
fought to achieve for ourselves and later
sought, in a modest measure, to help you
attain.

I share your feeling, Mr. Ambassador, that
the independence of Indonesia has served
to revive in the peoples of our hemisphere
the immemorial ties that have bound them
to one another. In the Philippines, however,
the rediscovery of our racial, geographic
and cultural oneness took place long before
Indonesia emerged as an independent and
sovereign nation. That is the reason why from
the beginning we embraced your cause as
our own.

But in order to preserve the freedom which
your people and mine have won at such
great sacrifice, it will be necessary not only
to nourish it within our respective countries
but to protect and advance it among
ourselves. It is, therefore, imperative that the
sense of solidarity which by blood, culture,
tradition and mutual desire is ours, should be
strengthened by methods of close economic,
political and cultural collaboration between
our two countries. It is our desire that the
happy and mutually beneficial relationship
that exists between Indonesia and the
Philippines be duplicated in our relationship
with the other countries of Southeast Asia and
the Western Pacific so that, while respecting
each other’s independence and sovereignty,
we may the more effectively devote ourselves
to our coordinated full development, insure
our stability and security and contribute to
the peace and progress of the world.

345

I extend to you, Mr. Ambassador, the fraternal
greetings of my countrymen and assure you
that during your sojurn in the Philippines you
will be among brothers who wish you well
and have the highest esteem for your country.

After the President has made his reply, the
Ambassador steps forward and shakes
hands with the President who, immediately
thereafter, presents the Ambassador to the
officials present. The Executive Secretary
moves behind the President to a post
between the Secretary and Undersecretary
of Foreign Affairs. All these officials now
arrange themselves in a straight line with
the President. After being introduced, the
Ambassador request permission from the
President to present the members of his staff.
The Ceremonial Officer escorts the members
of the staff to the President. He walks to
the left of the senior diplomatic officer. The
others follow them single file, in the order of
their precedence.

The Ceremonial Officer conducts the staff
in such a manner that they approach the
Ambassador and the President from the
President’s left.

The Ambassador, standing to the President’s
left, presents the members of his staff, who
file past the President and shake hands
with him and the members of his Cabinet.
Immediately after this, champagne is serve
and informal conversation takes place.

After about ten minutes, the Ambassador,
flanked by the Chief of Protocol and the
Senior Aide, resumes his original position
in the Ceremonial Hall. They bow slightly
and withdraw to the entrance separating the
Ceremonial Hall from the Reception Hall

where, turning about they bow again to
the President. The Ambassador’s staff then
follows.

Upon reaching the head of the staircase, the
Ambassador takes his leave of the Senior
Aide. The Junior Aide who accompanied
the Chief of Protocol at the beginning of the
ceremony then takes over.

The party once more forms beside the Palace
Chapel, facing the Presidential Guards and
the military band. The Guards present arms
while the band plays the National Anthem of
the Philippines.

At the conclusion of the National Anthem,
the Ambassador with the Chief of Protocol
and the Junior Aide to the President, leads
the return to the Embassy in the President’s
automobile. The others follow in the normal
order of their precedence, with the high-
ranking officials first, and the low-ranking
officials last.

PHOTO: Spa nish Ambassadors present their
credentials to President Manuel Roxas in the
Ceremonial Hall in Malacanan Palace. Circa 1947.
Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum and
Library.

346

In the Embassy drawing room, and after a
few minutes of conversation, the Chief of
Protocol and the Junior Aide take leave of
the Ambassador and the members of his
staff.

The reception of a minister is distinguished
from that of an ambassador in that only
a double row of guards renders military
honors. The playing of the national anthem
is omitted.

During the Third Republic the ceremony
was typically held in the Ceremonial Hall in
Malacnan Palace.

Today, the President normally receives
the credentials of incoming Ambassadors
in the Music Room in Malacanan Palace
but if several Ambassadors president their
credentials at the same time, the President
receives them at the Rizal Ceremonial Hall.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Salcedo, Luis Moreno. A Guide to Protocol.
Manila: University Book Supply, 1959.

PHOTO: President Benigno S. Aquino III receives
the credentials of the Italian Ambassador in the
Music Room during the Presentation of Credentials
Ceremony in February 2013. Photo courtesy of
Malacanang Photo Bureau.

PHOTO: President Benigno S. Aquino III,
accompanied by Secretary of Foreign Affairs Albert
del Rosario and Chief of Presidential Protocol Celia
Anna Feria, receives the credentials of nonresident
Ambassadors in a ceremony at the Rizal Hall in
Malacanan Palace. Photo courtesy of Malacanang
Photo Bureau.

347

atioe

Traditions and History

JUSTIN GATUSLAO, JEAN ARBOLEDA, AND FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

[This essay was initially published on the Official Gazette website in preparation for President
Benigno S. Awuino Ill’s sixth and last SONA on July 27, 2015]

On July 27, 2015, President Benigno S.
Aquino III will be delivering his sixth and
final State of the Nation Address (SONA).

The address of President Aquino III will be
the 77th since 1935 and the 29th since the

restoration of democratic rule under the
Fifth Republic in 1987.

The SONA is delivered by the President
of the Philippines every year. In it, the
Chief Executive reports on the state of the

348

country, unveils the government’s agenda
for the coming year, and may also propose
to Congress certain legislative measures.
The SONA is a constitutional obligation,
required by Article VII, Section 23 of the
1987 Constitution:

“[T]he President shall address the Congress
at the opening of its regular session."

Moreover, Article VI, Section 15 prescribes
that the Congress “shall convene once every
year on the fourth Monday of July for its
regular session.”

TRADITIONS AND PROCEDURE

PHOTO: Session Hall of Batasang Pambansa during
the 2011 SONA of President Benigno S. Aquino III.
Photo courtesy of Malacanang Photo Bureau.

The President of the Philippines appears
before Congress upon its invitation, for
which purpose a joint session is held in the
Session Hall of the House of Representatives.
Congress issues tickets, and all preparations
are undertaken with Congress as the official
host.

both chambers are ready to hear the address
of the President. Sessions of both Houses are
suspended.

In the afternoon, the President is met at
Batasang Pambansa, either planeside or
carside, by the Chief of Staff of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines and the Sergeants-
at-Arms of both Houses of Congress. The
Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces will
then escort the President past the Honor
Guard. At this point, the military escort
of the President is relieved of duty and
replaced by the Sergeant-at-Arms of the
House of Representatives, symbolizing
the independence of the Legislature. The
President is then escorted to the Presidential
Legislative Liaison Office (PLLO), which
serves as the chief executive’s office in the
House Representatives. The leaders of both
chambers traditionally pay a courtesy call on
the President in the PLLO.

A welcoming committee, appointed by
and among peers in both Chambers of
Congress, accompany the President into the
Session Hall. Upon his entry to the Session
Hall, the Speaker of the House announces
the arrival of the President, who takes his
position between the Senate President and
the Speaker of the House. The Joint Session
of Congress is thereafter called to order,
followed by the singing of the national
anthem and the invocation. After which, the
President descends to the rostrum to deliver
the SONA.

On Monday morning, both the House
of Representatives and the Senate hold
their respective sessions in their respective
chambers and elect their officials. Thereafter,
a concurrent resolution is filed stating that

After the message of the President, the
Speaker of the House and the President of
the Senate close the Joint Session of Congress
for their respective Chambers.

349

The life span of each Congress begins and
ends with the election of members of the
House of Representatives, who are to serve
for three years. The life span of a Congress is
subdivided in turn into three regular sessions,
each corresponding to a calendar year. Thus,
the SONA marks the opening of each regular
session of Congress.

The number of each given Congress — for
example, the 15th Congress — is based on how
many congresses were held since Philippine
independence on July 4, 1946. Thus, the
last Congress of the Commonwealth of
the Philippines elected on April 23, 1946 [11
became the First Congress of the Republic
of the Philippines upon independence. This
count was maintained until Martial Law was
declared by President Ferdinand E. Marcos in
1972. With the restoration of the Bicameral
Legislature in 1987, it was decided to
maintain the count, taking up where the last
pre-Martial Law Congress left off. Thus, the
last Congress under the 1935 Constitution
was the Seventh Congress, and the First
Congress under the 1987 Constitution
became the Eighth Congress.

HISTORICAL EVOLUTION
OF THE SONA

A. FIRST REPUBLIC (1898 - 1899)

The First Philippine Republic borrowed
from the European parliamentary tradition,
wherein the head of state ceremonially
opened sessions of the National Assembly.
According to the 1899 Constitution, the
President of the Philippines has the duty
to open, suspend, and close Congress. The
Constitution also gave the President the
power to communicate to Congress through

messages to be read to the National Assembly
(La Asamblea National) by Secretaries of
Government.

On September 15, 1898, President Emilio
Aguinaldo delivered an address during
the Inaugural Session of the Assembly of
Representatives, more popularly known
as the Malolos Congress. This speech
was not a SONA because it was merely a
congratulatory message to the Assembly
instead of a constitutionally mandated
report to the Legislature. The Malolos
Congress only had one formal opening. By
May 1899, it had been dissolved because of
the unfavorable war situation.

B. FROM THE PHILIPPINE COMMISSION
TO PHILIPPINE LEGISLATURE (1899-1935)

In 1899, during the Philippine- American War,
United States President William McKinley
appointed the First Philippine Commission
(known as the Schurman Commission)
to survey the Philippines and examine its
condition. As a result, a report on the status
of the Philippines was transmitted to the
United States President by the Commission
on January 31, 1900. [2] It recommended
the swift transition from military to civil
government, the establishment of local
government headed by Filipinos, and free
education. Thereafter, the Commission,
later replaced by the Second Philippine
Commission (the Taft Commission), would
send annual reports for the fiscal year to the
United States President through the United
States Secretary of Ward 31

The enactment of the Philippine Organic
Act of 1902 in the United States Congress
confirmed the office of the Governor General

350

of the Philippines under the authority of
the United States President, and set the
conditions for a bicameral legislature, with
the Philippine Commission to be made the
upper house and the Philippine Assembly,
to be filled by Filipinos through popular
vote. The law also mandated the Philippine
Commission “to make annual report of all
its receipts and expenditures to the Secretary
of War” but did not make any provision for
the Governor General to make a report to
the Philippine legislature.

Flowever, that same year, the Governor
General began addressing the Philippine
Legislature. It became an annual address
every opening session, termed as the
“Governor General’s annual message to the
Legislature.” 14 However this is not considered
a SONA because it was not a requirement.
The budget would then be submitted by the
secretary of finance and would be defended
in the legislature.

During the Philippine Assembly’s first session
on October 16, 1907 at the Marble Hall of
the Ayuntamiento Building,! 51 Governor
General James F. Smith, opened the assembly
and delivered a speech narrating the past
acts of the government leading to the
establishment of the Philippine Assembly.! 61
The Governor General’s address was then
followed by a speech by William Howard
Taft, then serving as the United States
Secretary of War [7] and representative of the
President of the United States. Secretary Taft’s
lengthy address reviewed the progress of
American administration of the Philippines
and emphasized the hopes of America for
the Philippines. 181 These instances were
precedents for the state tradition that became
the SONA.

PHOTO: The Philippine Assembly with Governor
General James F. Smith and the U.S. Secretary
of War William Howard Taft, on October 16, 1907
during the Assembly’s inaugural session. Photo
courtesy of the National Library of the Philippines.

On October 16, 1914, the Philippine
Legislature passed the Concurrent Resolution
No. 12, providing that the Philippine
Commission and the Philippine Assembly
hold a joint session in the session room of
the Philippine Assembly at Ayuntamiento for
the purpose of receiving the message of the
Chief Executive of the Islands, the Governor
General. 19 !

With the enactment of the Jones Law in
1916, the Governor General, no longer the
Philippine Commission, was required to
make an official report to the Secretary of War
of the United States on the administration of
the territory, who would then transmit the
report to the President of the United States.
The President of the United States in turn
would submit the report to the Congress of
the United States.

A separate tradition emerged, in which
the Governor General would address the
Philippine Legislature at the opening of
the annual session. This, however, was not
mandatory. What is interesting is that the
Governor General gave the message in
person. At this time in the United States, the
United States President did not give a message
in person. United States President Woodrow

351

Wilson would begin the current United States
tradition of addressing Congress in person in
1913. [1 °]

Both official and in the media, this tradition
was simply known as the “Governor
General’s annual message to the Legislature.”
As the representative of a foreign power,
and Chief Executive representing American
authority, it was clear that his task was to
uphold American policies and not serve as
the leader of Filipinos. This role was taken
by Filipino legislators elected by the people.

C. COMMONWEALTH OF THE PHILIPPINES
( 1935 - 1941 )

The SONA, as an annual practice we know
it today, began during the Commonwealth
of the Philippines. The 1935 Constitution
as amended, stated in Article VII, Section 5
that:

"[T]he President shall from time to time give
to the Congress information on the state of the
Nation, and recommend to its consideration
such measures as he shall judge necessary
and expedient.”

Thus, the annual address to the Legislature
became known as the SONA.

The first SONA was delivered during a
special session of the National Assembly
on November 25, 1935. President Manuel
L. Quezon mentioned in his speech that he
was delivering his message in fulfillment of
the Constitutional mandate to give a report
of “the state of the Nation” to Congress on
its opening session. Thus, the priority of his
speech involved the “first and most urgent

PHOTO: Governor General Leonard Wood addresses
the Legislature at the Marble Hall in Ayuntamiento.
Seen in the rostrum are Senate President Manuel L.
Quezon and House Speaker Manuel Roxas. Photo
courtesy of Library of Congress.

PHOTO: President Manuel L. Quezon delivers his
Third State of the Nation Address to the National
Assembly on October 18, 1937 at the Legislative
Building, Manila. Photo from The Herald on
October 19, 1937 from the Histogravure of Manuel
L. Quezon.

need” involving the “very existence when
we become a free member of the family of
nations”-the establishment of a national
defense policy.

Thereafter, the date of the opening of the
sessions of the National Assembly were
fixed, pursuant to Commonwealth Act No.
17, at June 16 of every year. The second
SONA was delivered by President Quezon at
the Legislative Building on June 16, 1936, the
first to be delivered before a regular session.
Commonwealth Act No. 49, however,
amended Commonwealth Act No. 17 and
designated the 16th of October as the date
of the opening of the regular sessions of the

352

TOP: (left) Assemblymen N.T. Bupisan, Juan S. Alano, and Enrique B. Magalina notifying President Manuel L.
Quezon that the National Assembly is in session, (right) Speaker Gil Montilla and Assemblyman Manuel A.
Alzate greet each other on the way to the Session Hall. BOTTOM: (left) Assemblymen entering the Session
Hall, (right) Narciso Pimentel, secretary of the Assembly, reading the message of the President.

Photo from The Herald, January 25, 1938.

National Assembly. As this fell on a Saturday
in 1937, the third SONA was delivered by
President Quezon on Monday, October 18,
1937.

With the approval of Commonwealth Act
No. 244 of December 10, 1937, the date of
the opening of the regular sessions of the
National Assembly was again moved to the

353

fourth Monday of every year, starting in
1938. However, there were instances when
President Quezon would deliver a speech to
the National Assembly, calling the legislature
into a special session to enact a certain
law or bring certain issues to the floor for
immediate attention. This was done on July
25, 1938, when President Quezon called on
the National Assembly regarding the election
law and other immediate concerns. This was
not a SONA since no mention of the state of
the country was given in the speech. President
Quezon delivered his sixth and last SONA
on January 31, 1941, as he would already
be in exile the following year because of the
Japanese occupation.

D. SECOND REPUBLIC (1943-1945)

President Jose P. Laurel of the Second
Philippine Republic was able to deliver his
first and only message before the special
session of the National Assembly, led by
Speaker Benigno Aquino, on October 18,
1943, four days after the Republic was
established. This also took place in the
Legislative Building, Manila. However,
Laurel, who was one of the delegates who
drafted the 1935 Constitution, pointed out
in his address that the 1943 Constitution did
not provide for a report to the Legislature
on the state of the nation and that his speech
was not a SONA. His message before the
assembly, therefore, is not included in the
roster of SONAs.

E. RESTORED COMMONWEALTH (1945)

With the defeat of the Imperial Japanese
forces and the reestablishment of the
Commonwealth Government in the

PHOTO: Jose P. Laurel, President of the Second
Philippine Republic, addresses the National
Assembly in the Legislative Building (National
Museum). The National Assembly under Japanese
Occupation would use the Senate Session
Hall rather than that of the House. Photo from
Assembly of the Nation: A Centennial History of
the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

PHOTO: President Sergio Osmena’s first and only
state of the nation address delivered at Lepanto
Street, Manila on June 9, 1945. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

354

Philippines, the Congress of the Philippines,
elected in 1941 as a bicameral body,
convened on June 9, 1945. This was the
second time the SONA was delivered before
a special session. During this special session,
President Sergio Osmena addressed the
lawmakers at their provisional quarters in a
converted school house at Lepanto Street in
Manila and gave a comprehensive report on
the work carried out by the Commonwealth
Government during its three-year stay in
Washington, D.C. Furthermore, he described
the conditions prevailing in the Philippines
during the period of occupation and an
acknowledgment of the invaluable assistance
rendered by the guerrillas to the American
forces in the liberation of the Philippines.
This was President Osmena’s first and only
SONA.

The last SONA under the Commonwealth
of the Philippines was delivered by President
Manuel Roxas on June 3, 1946. After the
establishment of the independent Republic
of the Philippines on July 4, 1946, the SONA
was to be delivered on the fourth Monday
of January, pursuant to Commonwealth Act
No. 244, starting with President Roxas’s
address to the First Congress of the Republic
on January 27, 1947.

F. THIRD REPUBLIC (1946-1972)

Starting in 1949, the address was held at the
reconstructed Legislative Building. Only once
did a president not appear personally before
Congress: on January 23, 1950, President
Elpidio Quirino, who was recuperating at
the Johns Flopkins Hospital in Baltimore,
Maryland, delivered his SONA to the Joint
Session of Congress via radio broadcast
through RCS in the United States that was
picked up by the local radio network at
10:00 a.m., just in time for the opening of
the regular Congressional session.

PHOTO: President Elpidio Quirino’s Second State
of the Nation Address delivered from his hospital
bed in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, January 23,
1950. This was the only SONA delivered via radio
broadcast to Congress. Photo taken from Apo
Lakay: The Biography of President Elpidio Quirino
of the Philippines by Carlos Quirino, courtesy of
the President Elpidio Quirino Foundation.

355

PHOTO: President Ramon Magsaysay’s First State
of the Nation Address, January 25, 1954. Photo
courtesy of the National Library of the Philippines.

PHOTO: President Carlos P. Garcia during his
Fourth State of the Nation Address on January
23, 1961. Photo courtesy of the National Library of
the Philippines.

The SONA of 1970 delivered by President
Ferdinand E. Marcos on January 26, 1970
marked the start of the First Quarter Storm,
a period of unrest brought about by student-
led political demonstrations that took place
in Manila from January to March 1970. The
last SONA under the 1935 Constitution was
delivered on January 24, 1972.

G. MARTIAL LAW AND THE FOURTH
REPUBLIC (1972-1986)

On September 23, 1972, President Ferdinand
E. Marcos declared Martial Law. Congress
was padlocked before it was due to
commence on January 22, 1973 when there
was supposed to be a SONA.

From 1 973 to 1 977, the SONA was delivered
on the official anniversary of the imposition
of Martial Law on September 21 of each
year (official because Martial Law was
actually imposed on September 23, 1972),
and because Congress was abolished with
the promulgation of the 1973 Constitution,
these addresses were delivered before an
assembly either in Malacanan Palace or
at Rizal Park, except in 1976, when the
address was given during the opening of the
Batasang Bayan (appointed legislative body)
at the Philippine International Convention
Center. Whenever the 21st of September fell
on Sunday, the SONA would be delivered
the Friday before. This was the case in the
tenth SONA of President Marcos which was
delivered on September 19, 1975. Moreover,
the term “State of the Nation” was altogether
dropped in the 1973 Constitution.

President Marcos began delivering the
SONA at the Batasang Pambansa in Quezon
City on June 12, 1978, during the opening

session of the Interim Batasang Pambansa.
From 1979 onward, the SONA was delivered
on the fourth Monday of July, following
the provisions of the 1973 and, later, 1987

356

PHOTO: Student protesters camped outside
the Legislative Building while President Marcos
delivered his address to the legislature in 1970.
Into the next year, Congress was besieged by
rallies of radicals and activists, the event known
as the First Quarter Storm. Photo from Assembly
of the Nation: A Centennial History of the House
of Representatives of the Philippines.

PHOTO: President Ferdinand E. Marcos delivering his
Second State of the Nation Address in the Legislative
Building in Manila on January 23, 1967. Photo courtesy
of the National Library of the Philippines.

Constitutions. The only exceptions have
been in 1983, when the SONA was delivered
on January 17 to commemorate the
anniversary of the ratification of the 1973
Constitution and the second anniversary
of the lifting of Martial Law, and in 1986,
when President Corazon C. Aquino, who
had declared a revolutionary government,
did not deliver any SONA. However, on June
4, 1986, to mark her first 100 days in office,
President Corazon C. Aquino delivered a

PHOTO: President Ferdinand E. Marcos bangs
a gavel as he presides over the Batasang Bayan
in 1977 at the Plenary Hall of the Philippine
International Convention Center. Photo from
Assembly of the Nation: A Centennial History of
the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

PHOTO: President Ferdinand E. Marcos delivers
his Thirteenth SONA to the Interim Batasang
Pambansa on June 12, 1978. Photo from Assembly
of the Nation: A Centennial History of the House
of Representatives of the Philippines.

357

State of the Nation

F IFTEEN years ago, in this season of the year, my husband stood
in the Senate and delivered what turned out to be the valedictory
of Philippine democracy. He exposed the conspiracy to place the
country under martial law, dissolve the Congress and set the stage for
the unremitting plunder of our patrimony, and the degradation of our
great name and honor.

i SPECIAL REPORT ON AGRARIAN REFORM^]

PHOTO: President Corazon C. Aquino’s 1987 SONA
was published in the now defunct Malacanang
Journal. The photo shows her on the rostrum of
the Batasang Pambansa, with Speaker Ramon
Mitra and Senate President Jovito Salonga. Photo
courtesy of the Presidential Museum and Library.

speech addressing the status of the nation in
the form of a panel discussion with several
members of her cabinet broadcasted from
Malacanan Palace.

FIFTH REPUBLIC

With the restoration of Congress in 1987,
President Corazon C. Aquino was able to
deliverher first SONA in the Session Hall
of the House of Representatives at the
Batasang Pambansa Complex, Quezon City.
This marked the return of the Constitutional
requirement. However, the 1987 Constitution
dropped the term “State of the Nation” but
the name had become traditional. In her
1987 SONA, President Corazon C. Aquino
specifically said:

PHOTO: President Fidel V. Ramos addresses the
Congress during his Second State of the Nation
Address on July 26, 1993. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

PHOTO: President Joseph Ejercito Estrada
addressing the Congress during his First State of the
Nation Address on July 27, 1998. Photo taken from
the Millennium President by Adrian E. Cristobal.

, Li '

P- - -j-

m : _

PHOTO: President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
addressing the Congress during her Seventh
State of the Nation Address on July 23, 2007.
Photo from Malacanang Photo Bureau.

358

The complete leadership of this country
has been chosen; the configuration of their
powers and duties permanently set by the
new Constitution.

An election is as much an expression as it
is an exercise of the national will. We have
been made instruments of this will. Our
performance will bear witness to its wisdom.

It is my duty under the Constitution to
apprise you now of the state of the nation—
but henceforth its continuing progress shall
be our common accountability.

Presidents Corazon C. Aquino, Fidel V.
Ramos, Joseph Ejercito Estrada, Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, and Benigno S. Aquino
III all delivered their SONAs at the same
venue.

ENDNOTES

[1J Dapen Liang, Philippine Parties
and Politics: A Historical Study of
National Experience in Democracy
(San Francisco, CA: The Gladstone
Company, 1970), 283.

[2] United States Philippine Commission,

Report of the Philippine Commission
to the President, January 31, 1900
(Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1900), 1.

[3] United States Philippine Commission,

Report of the Philippine Commission
to the Secretary of War, 1915 (January
1, 1915 to December 31, 1915)
(Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1916), 3.

[4] “Gov. Gen. Francis Burton Harrison, a

man who was sympathetic toward the
Filipino cause, urged the repeal of the
Flag Law in his 17th annual message to
the Legislature,” Philippine Free Press,
June 9, 1956, accessed July 20, 2015,
https://philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 956/06/09/how-our-flag-flew-
again-june-9-1 956/.

[5] Manuel III Quezon et al., Assembly

of the Nation: A Centennial History
of the House of Representatives of
the Philippines, 1907-2007 (Quezon
City: House of Representatives of the
Philippines, 2007), 51.

6] Manuel III Quezon, “First Session of
the Philippine Assembly, October
16, 1907,” Philippine Free Press,
accessed July 16, 2015, https://
philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1 907/10/16/first-session-of-the-
philippine-assembly-october-16-1907/.

[7] Keith Justice, Presidents, Vice Presidents,

Cabinet Members, Supreme Court
Justices, 1789-2003: Vital and Official
Data (Jefferson, NC: McFarland and
Company, 2003), 11.

[8] Quezon et al., Assembly of the Nation,

51.

[9] Public Faws Enacted by the Philippine

Fegislature during the Period October
16, 1914 to October 15, 1915, Volume
X (Manila: Bureau of Printing, 1916),
305.

[10] “Historical State of the Union
Messages,” National Archives of the
United States of America, accessed July
21, 2015, http://www.archives.gov/
legislative/features/sotu/.

359

of Malacafiae Palace

SASHA MARTINEZ

Malacanan Palace stands as the office and
the official residence of the President of
the Philippines. It is “the expression, in
ornamental landscaping, in concrete, wood,
and stone, of the office of the presidency ,”! 11
and is “the embodiment of the supreme
authority in the country, indivisible, in many
ways, but also imbued with a history of its
own, as an almost organic institution on its
own.” 121

And in its role as the epicenter of “the pomp
of state and the minutiae of governance ,” 131
perhaps no ritual of the inauguration is so
steeped in history and legend, and so symbolic
of the gravitas accorded the highest office in
the land, as a President’s first climbing of its
main stairs.

Indeed, even the transfer of power from one
president to another is affirmed through
these stairs. On his successor’s inaugural, the
President descends the stairs of the Palace
accompanied by the President-elect — thus
marking the formal act of leaving office for
the incumbent. The President-elect will then
symbolically mark the start of his presidency
by climbing the same stairs later in the day.
The ritual climbing of the stairs — symbolizing

the possession of the Malacanan Palace —
was a tradition conscientiously began by
President Manuel L. Quezon. As he would
write in his memoirs:

“From the grandstand, I went through streets
crowded with people acclaiming their first
President, on to the Palace of Malacanan, the
great mansion on the bank of the Pasig River
which had been the seat of power of foreign
rulers for many decades past. As I stepped
out of the presidential car and walked over
the marble floor of the entrance hall, and up
the wide stairway, I remembered the legend
of the mother of Rizal, the great Filipino
martyr and hero, who went up those stairs on
her knees to seek executive clemency from
the cruel Spanish Governor-General Polavieja,
that would save her son's life .” 141

President Quezon wanted the ritual to
symbolize that, henceforth, a Filipino
chief executive would be governing from
Malacanan Palace, one who could walk up
the stairs proudly as the leader of his own
people; at the same time, ascending those
stairs would be a constant reminder to every
president of the portion of the oath of office
which pledges justice to every man.

360

In a speech, its current occupant President
Benigno S. Aquino III acknowledged the
prevailing view of Malacanan Palace, that “it is a
well-guarded structure, removed from everyday
life: a house of power and authority whose
occupants influence the lives of all Filipinos.” 151
Although presidents of recent history have
tried, in varying degrees, to “shatter” this
perception, the very roots of Malacanan Palace
had it looming over its constituents as a seat of
power, distant and lofty.

The two most resonant stories that
intertwine Malacanan’s narrative and the
martyrdom of Dr. Jose Rizal, perhaps, best
embody this viewpoint. The first story has
Rizal’s sisters, one evening, standing before
the Palace gates that were barred to them,
awaiting a glimpse of Spanish Governor
General Camilo de Polavieja. Earlier that
day, Polavieja had ordered for Rizal to be
shot at seven in the morning of the 30th in
the field of Bagumbayan. When the sisters
saw the Governor General, they fell at his
feet and plead for clemency. They were
denied. 161 Rizal would be executed by firing
squad just as dawn broke on December 30,
1896 — from a verdict passed within the halls
of Malacanan Palace itself. 171

The second, more oft-recalled lore — the
story that has, however unverified, lent
more influence over Malacanan and its
residents — was when the Palace opened
its doors to Teodora Alonso, mother of
the condemned Rizal. Legend states that
Mrs. Alonzo went up the grand staircase
of the Governor General’s residence, on her
knees, to beg for her son’s life. This was a
mother’s humbling — no thought spared for
pride; abject supplication the most poignant
offering to save one’s child. 181

The sisters’ futile attempt to lobby for their
brother’s life only serves to underscore the
unyielding nature of the Palace during the
Spanish colonial rule. However, the eventual
transformation of Malacanan Palace as
an institution for the people owes much to
the legend of Mrs. Alonzo. Rizal’s mother
was denied, too, despite her heart-rending
humbling — she would outlive her son for
fifteen years. To trace this legend and to
examine its resonance may well point us
to the starkness of the divide between the
Spaniards and the people of the archipelago
they had long ruled over. That Mrs. Alonzo
had dared present an entreaty — that
Malacanan had relented to let her in, on
her knees or otherwise — was too stirring
an image to not let live on. Too chilling a
reminder of the oppressions of colonial rule
to not let imbue an independent state.

For President Quezon, it was necessary to
ensure all the accouterments accorded the
highest office of the land. Indeed, “the day
Quezon took possession of Malacanan was
trumpeted as an act of racial vindication.
Certainly the first president of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines viewed
his occupancy of Malacanan on November
15, 1935 as just that; but it was also an
act of personal vindication, of ambition.
As early as 1917, Quezon had already
expressed his intention to live in the palace,
and by 1933, during the negotiations for
the Hare-Hawes-Cutting Act, the question
of who would live in Malacanan became an
important consideration.” Quezon wrote in a
memorandum to Representative Butler Hare,
apropos of the Palace:

361

[Malacanan Palace] is historically the residence
of the chief executive of the Philippines, and,
to give it to the High Commissioner, only
emphasizes the secondary position the chief
executive of the Commonwealth.

Contemporary journalist Walter Robb
succinctly examines the political significance
of turning over the Palace to Filipino leaders:

Quezon was ever a bit fearful that Filipinos
would find this triumph of the fundamental
American policy unbelievable, that they would
think it is too good to be true, this evidence
that their long passive resistance to every
alteration of the policy [of independence
for the Philippines] had actually succeeded.
Quezon therefore wished to give them a
sign. In the bill originally passed [the Hare-
Hawes-Cutting Act] he found the flaw that
the American High Commissioner (during
the ten-year Commonwealth, Frank Murphy’s
transmutation from the governorship) would
continue living in Malacanan. Quezon stuck
for this to be changed, that Malacanan be
the Philippine President’s residence; that
is to say, his residence. So old is Malacanan
as the seat of government, unless he lived
there the President would have no prestige
whatsoever, the people would not believe he
had any actual authority, they would rate him
no more than Washington’s puppet.™

And so it was on “the fine, clear, and cold
morning” of November 15, 1935, after he
had taken his oath as president of the newly
established Commonwealth of the Philippines
Quezon led the crowd to Malacanan Palace.
At last, a Filipino — one chosen by the very
people he was to lead — was to live in the
edifice that had, since time immemorial,
been the seat of two colonial governments.
The climbing of the stairs would henceforth

signify that the chief executive was the
freely-elected head of the Filipino people,
one pledged to govern them with justice in
contrast to the appointed colonial governors
who formerly inhabited the Palace. He could
stand tall as a leader elected by the people,
in contrast to the chosen representatives
of governments of distant lands. The ritual
climbing of the stairs, at the start of a
presidency, would then on remain a simple
yet eloquent act reclaiming that which had
once been denied Filipinos.

ENDNOTES

[1] Manuel L. Quezon III, Paolo Alcazaren,

and Jeremy Barns, Malacanan Palace:
The Official Illustrated History
(Manila: Studio 5 Publishing, 2005),

19.

[2] Ibid., 18.

[3] Ibid., 19.

[4] Manuel L. Quezon, The Good Fight:

The Autobiography of Manuel Luis
Quezon (New York, NY: W. Morgan
Shuster, 1944), 152.

[5] “Speech of President Aquino at the

premier of National Geographic’s
Inside Malacanan, February 28, 2012,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed March 14, 2016,
http://www.gov.ph/2012/02/29/speech-
of-president-aquino-at-the-premier-of-
inside-malacanan-february-28-2012/.

[6] Leon Ma. Guerrero, The First Filipino:

A Biography of Jose Rizal (Manila:
National Historical Institute, 2008), 479.

[7] Ibid., 490.

[8] Quezon, The Good Fight, 152.

[9] American Chamber of Commerce of

the Philippines Journal (Ann Arbor,
Michigan: University of Michigan
Library, 1936), 15.

362

Y If IT

line

History, and Symbolism
of the Presidentia.
Inauguration

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, JUSTIN GATUSLAO, AND SASHA MARTINEZ

[This essay was originally published on the
Presidential Museum and Library website to
commemorate the second anniversary of the
inauguration of President Benigno S. Aquino,
June 30, 2012]

Inaugurations — swathed in pomp and
circumstance, solemnity and ceremony —
signal the assumption of the President’s
stewardship of the nation that put him in
power. The President comes into his or her
role of power-and-servitude; transition
of governance is formalized with all the
accouterments of state; there occurs an
affirmation of the mandate granted by the
Filipino people.

Two years ago, on June 30, 2010, Benigno
S. Aquino III took his oath of office at
the Quirino Grandstand and became the
15th President of the Philippines — the
fifth president of the Fifth Republic of
the Philippines. President Aquino III, for

his inaugural, followed the tradition set
by those that preceded him — and, like his
predecessors, too, built on the rites that mark
his first day of office.

THE PRESIDENT AND THE PRESIDENT-
ELECT

The President and the Vice President shall
be elected by direct vote of the people for
a term of six years which shall begin at noon
on the thirtieth day of June next following the
day of the election and shall end at the same
day six years thereafter.

- Article VII, Section 4 of the 1987 Philippine
Constitution.

Inaugurals signal the transfer of power from
the incumbent President to the President-
elect, who is recognized as such upon the

363

PHOTO: President-elect Ramon Magsaysay
was invited to try out the presidential chair by
President Elpidio Quirino when he arrived to fetch
the latter at Malacanan Palace. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

PHOTO: President-elect Diosdado Macapagal
departs from his residence on Laura Street,
San Juan to fetch President Carlos P. Garcia
at Malacanan Palace. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

proclamation of both Houses of Congress.
Two years ago, at nine in the morning,
President-elect Benigno S. Aquino III left his
residence at Times Street, Quezon City, thus
ushering the start of his assumption into
office. An hour later, he fetched President
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from Malacanan
Palace, which would, by that day’s end, be
his official residence and office. This tradition
dates back to the inauguration of President
Manuel Roxas — the first transfer of power
from an incumbent (President Osmena) to a
president-elect (President Roxas), who was
his rival for the presidency.

[C]ontinuity of government was demonstrated
by having a bipartisan committee of [officials]
pick up the president-elect in his residence
and take him to Malacanan. From there, the
incumbent President and the incoming one,

along with one member of the committee,
board the presidential car for the ride to
then-independence Grandstand where the
old and the new part ways. Ninoy Aquino was
in the committee which picked up Macapagal
at his mother in law’s house on Laura Street,
San Juan on December 30, 1961 to escort him
to Malacanan to fetch President Garcia for
the ride to the Luneta. Ninoy was also among
those who fetched Marcos at his Ortega
Street residence also in San Juan December
30, 1965 to pick up Macapagal at Malacanan.
He rode with Marcos and Macapagal in the car
that ultimately took Macapagal to retirement,
Marcos to Makiki Heights and him, Ninoy to
the tarmac of the airport which now bears his
name.

- Raul S. Gonzales, Press Secretary of
President Diosdado Macapagal.

364

The departure of the incumbent President,
accompanied by the President-elect, marks
the formal act of leaving office for the
incumbent, who descends the stairs of the
Palace for the last time. The President-elect
will then symbolically mark the start of his
presidency by climbing the same stairs later
in the day. [1]

At the inaugural venue, a twenty-one gun
salute, accompanied by the honor guard
presenting arms, and four ruffles (drum
rolls) and flourishes (trumpet blasts) and the
playing of the national anthem herald the
arrival of the President and the President-
elect. This is the last time the Armed Forces
of the Philippines renders honors to the
incumbent President as head of state. The
incumbent President will troop the line and
receive the salute of the honor guard and bid
farewell to the major service commanders. 121

PHOTO: President Elpidio Quirino receives military
honors for the last time, accompanied by President-
elect Ramon Magsaysay. After the honors, the two
shook hands and President Quirino departed to
his rest house in Novaliches, while President-elect
Magsaysay ascended the platform for his oath-
taking. Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum
and Library.

Tradition dictates that the outgoing President
departs the inauguration venue; this is a
tradition that dates back to the inauguration
of President Magsaysay in 1953, and followed
in the Macapagal and Marcos inaugurals in
1961 and 1965. The symbolism is that the
old administration has come to an end, and
the new one begins. Ideally, as per tradition,
at the moment the President-elect takes his
oath as President at 12 noon, the incumbent
is already at home to mark his reverting to
being an ordinary citizen. [3]

The only Presidents to have attended the
inaugurals of their successors were: Osmena
in 1946, Aquino in 1992, and Ramos in
1998. Osmena attended because it was the
first time power was to be transferred from
one party to another; Aquino, to symbolize
the first peaceful and constitutional transfer
of power since 1969; and Ramos as part of
the centennial celebrations of 1998. 141

365

PHOTO: On July 4, 1946, as part of the
Independence Ceremony, President Manuel
Roxas retook his oath of office to serve the newly
inaugurated Republic. His predecessor Sergio
Osmena was present at both oath-takings.

Photo courtesy of LIFE Magazine.

PHOTO: President Fidel V. Ramos and President-
elect Joseph Ejercito Estrada arrive together at
Barasoain Church, June 30, 1998. Photo courtesy
of the Presidential Museum and Library.

It was originally a replica of the original
Independence Grandstand built specifically
for the Independence Ceremonies of July 4,
1946, when the separate and self-governing
Republic of the Philippines was established.
Seven Presidents have been inaugurated at
the Quirino Grandstand: Quirino (1949),
Magsaysay (1953), Garcia (1957), Macapagal
(1961), Marcos (1965, 1969, 1981), Ramos
(1992), and President Aquino (2010).

INAUGURAL VENUES

The Quirino Grandstand, previously called
Independence Grandstand and renamed
after President Elpidio Quirino who first
took his oath there, has been the favored
inaugural venue for Presidents since 1949.

PHOTO: View of the Independence Grandstand
built during the Quirino Administration, facing
the Rizal monument. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

PHOTO: President Elpidio Quirino at his 1949
inaugural, in the grandstand that would bear his
name. Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum
and Library.

366

Photo from the Quezon Memorial book.

Arrival of Emilio Aguinaldo ai Malolos on January 23, 1899.

Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum and Library.

Quezon (1935), Laurel (1943), and Roxas
(1946) were inaugurated on the steps of
the Legislative Building in Manila. Other
inaugurals have been held elsewhere in
Manila due to extraordinary circumstances:
Aquino (1986) in Club Filipino and Marcos
(1986) in Maharlika Hall (renamed Kalayaan
Hall), and Arroyo (2001) at EDSA Shrine.

Four inaugurals have taken place outside
Manila: Barasoain Church in Malolos, Bulacan
in 1899 (Aguinaldo) and 1998 (Estrada);
Corregidor Island in 1941 (Quezon); and
Cebu City in 2004 (Arroyo). However, both
Estrada and Arroyo delivered their inaugural
addresses at the Quirino Grandstand.

The only inauguration held on foreign soil
was that of Osmena (1944) in Washington

PHOTO: Congratulated by U.S. Associate Justice
Robert Jackson after he administered the oath of
office, August 1, 1944 in Washington D.C., Osmena
was the first Philippine Vice President to assume the
presidency upon the death of his predecessor. Photo
courtesy of the Presidential Museum and Library.

D.C., following the death of President
Manuel L. Quezon.

Starting with Quezon’s second inaugural in
1941 until Marcos’ second inaugural in 1969
(with the exception of the special election
called in 1946) presidents were inaugurated
on Rizal Day, December 30. Six presidents —
Quezon (1941), Quirino (1949), Magsaysay,
Garcia (1957), Macapagal, Marcos (1965,
1969) had inaugurals on December 30.
Presidents Marcos (1981), Ramos (1992),
Estrada (1998), Arroyo (2004), and Aquino
(2010) — were all inaugurated on June 30.

THE INAUGURAL CEREMONIES

The program usually begins with the singing
of the National Anthem, followed by an
ecumenical invocation. From 1935 until
1969, the highest-ranking prelate of the
Catholic Church traditionally delivered the
invocation. President Marcos was the first
President to have an ecumenical invocation
in 1969. M

367

Reading by the President of the Senate of
the Proclamation by the Congress of the
Philippines announcing the results of the
elections in the Philippines.

This is a practice established with the
Commonwealth inauguration in 1935, and
last undertaken in 1969, although a similar
proclamation was read proclaiming the New
Republic, in 1981. Revived in the 2010
inaugural, the Senate President reads the
proclamation, which is the final official act of
the 15th Congress. It provides the democratic
and constitutional basis for the mandate of
the individuals about to be inducted into
office, and represents the legislative branch
of government witnessing the inaugural of
the executive branch. The Senate President
does so as the head of the portion of the
legislature that is considered a continuing
body. [6]

Administration of the Oath of Office to the
Vice President-elect of the Philippines.

For the 2010 inaugural, the Vice President-
elect took his oath in Filipino; his wife Dr.
Elenita S. Binay held the bible. Four ruffles
and flourishes were rendered by the Armed

Forces of the Philippines immediately upon
the conclusion of the Vice-President’s oath of
office. The public rose and remained standing
throughout the oath-taking ceremonies of the
Vice President and the President. The public
resumed their seats upon the commencement
of the President’s Inaugural Address.

THE PRESIDENT-ELECT’S OATH OF OFFICE

With the pledge “I do solemnly swear...,” the
stewardship of the nation passes on to a
new chief executive. This rite of presidential
transition is thus not all ceremonials, but is as
dynamic as democracy itself.

- ...So Help Us God: The Presidents of the
Philippines and their Inaugural Addresses, by
J. Eduardo Malaya and Jonathan E. Malaya.

At 12:00 p.m. of June 30, 2010, the
Honorable Benigno S. Aquino III, President-
elect of the Philippines, was administered the
Oath of Office by Supreme Court Associate
Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales. The bible
on which he placed his left hand was held by
Catalino Arevalo, S.J.

Associate Justice Carpio-Morales was the
second Filipino Associate Justice to administer
the oath of office, although this was the fourth
time an associate justice has administered the
oath of office to a Philippine president (this
happened twice during the period in exile of
the Commonwealth Government, and once
during the revolutionary oath taking by
Corazon C. Aquino). In 1899, the oath was
administered by the Speaker of the Malolos
Congress, since President Emilio Aguinaldo
was elected by Congress. Since 1935, the
legislative branch of government witnesses

368

PHOTO: Corazon C. Aquino, with her hand resting
on a bible held by her late husband’s mother
Doha Aurora Aquino, recites the presidential oath,
administered by Supreme Court Senior Justice
Claudio Teehankee. Photo courtesy of Kim Komenich

and participates in the inauguration in this
manner. [7]

From Aguinaldo to Elpidio Quirino,
presidents did not swear on the bible, a
legacy of the Revolution of 1896 and the
separation of Church and State. President
Ramon Magsaysay was the first president
to swear on the bible, in fact using two, one
from his father’s and mother’s branch of the
family. The bibles were placed on the lectern.
In 1957, Bohol Governor Juan Pajo held the
bible as Carlos P. Garcia, a fellow Boholano,
took his oath. President Marcos, in 1969,
also swore on two bibles, one from his father,
the other a gift from his wife. [7]

According to the Malayas, in their book on
inaugurals:

Most presidents took oath with their left hand
placed on a Bible. The Constitution provides
for either the taking of an oath or making
an affirmation in case the president-elect
is a non-believer. In case of an affirmation,
the line ‘So help me God’ is omitted. The
affirmation proviso is in line with the principle
of the separation of Church and State as well

369

as the 'non-establishment of religion’ clause
which says ‘no religious test shall be required
for the exercise of civil and political rights.™

The oath of office of the President of the
Philippines, prescribed by every Philippine
Constitution since 1935, has remained
essentially unchanged:

I do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will
faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties
as President [or Vice-President or Acting
President] of the Philippines, preserve and
defend its Constitution, execute its laws, do
justice to every man, and consecrate myself
to the service of the Nation. So help me God.”
[In case of affirmation, last sentence will be
omitted.]

In Filipino:

Mataimtim kong pinanunumpaan (o
pinatotohanan) na tutuparin ko nang buong
katapatan at sigasig ang aking mga tungkulin
bilang Pangulo (o Pangalawang Pangulo
o Nanunungkulang Pangulo) ng Pilipinas,
pangangalagaan at ipagtatanggol ang
kanyang Konstitusyon, ipatutupad ang mga
batas nito, magiging makatarungan sa bawat
tao, at itatalaga ang aking sarili sa paglilingkod
sa Bansa. Kasihan nawa ako ng Diyos. [Kapag
pagpapatotoo, ang huling pangungusap ay
kakaltasin.]

Aguinaldo took his oath in Spanish. Quezon,
Osmena, Roxas, Quirino, Magsaysay,
Garcia, Macapagal, Aquino, and Arroyo
took their oath in English. Laurel, Marcos,
Ramos, Estrada, and Aquino III took their
oath in Filipino.

At the conclusion of the oath of office, a
twenty-one gun salute, four ruffles (drum
rolls) and flourishes (trumpet blasts), and
the playing of “Mabuhay” — the presidential
anthem composed by Tirso Cruz Sr. and
which has been used since the Quezon
administration — take place.

THE INAUGURAL ADDRESS

President Benigno S. Aquino III delivered his
inaugural address on June 30, 2010.

Sigaw natin noong kampanya: “Kung walang
corrupt, walang mahirap.” Hindi lamang
ito pang slogan o pang poster— ito ang
mga prinsipyong tinatayuan at nagsisilbing
batayan ng ating administrasyon.

Ang ating pangunahing tungkulin ay ang
magsikap na maiangat ang bansa mula sa
kahirapan, sa pamamagitan ng pagpapairal
ng katapatan at mabuting pamamalakad sa
pamahalaan. [,0]

President Benigno S. Aquino III was the
ninth president to deliver his inaugural
address at the Quirino Grandstand. Estrada
and Arroyo were sworn into office elsewhere
but delivered their inaugural address at the
Quirino Grandstand in 1998 and 2004.

The addresses delivered by the 14 Philippine
presidents on their first day in office . . . had
common threads. They all sought to reassure
the Filipino people, offer leadership in the
arduous tasks ahead, and hopefully win
them over to a vision of a better future. The
ebullient optimism prevalent in inaugurals
was best expressed by Ramon Magsaysay,
the nation’s seventh chief executive, when

370

he unabashedly exclaimed, “I have been
warned that too much is expected of this
administration, that our people expect the
impossible. For this young and vigorous
nation of ours, nothing is really impossible.’™

Inaugural addresses usually project, as a
theme, the philosophy or priorities of the
incoming administration, and at times,
inaugurate what the new leadership believes
is a significant new chapter in the nation’s
life. The speeches of Carlos P. Garcia and
Diosdado Macapagal described priority
programs and specific projects. In contrast,
those of Ramon Magsaysay and Ferdinand
Marcos, particularly the latter’s second
inaugural, emphasized vision and larger
purposes.

Most inaugurals follow a certain structure:
first comes the President’s gratitude for being
elevated to high office, at times expression
of humility about his or her abilities, then a
promise to work hard to serve the people,
and finally an invitation to ail to help him do
his best. It is considered in good taste to say
kind words about the president’s immediate
predecessor, even if he belonged to the
other political party. Estrada, for instance,
paid compliments to Ramos for the reform
programs that revived the economy. A
number of presidents spiced their speeches
with quotations from eminent personalities,
notably national hero Jose Rizal. As the
address comes to a close, most chief
executives appealed to Divine Providence for
aid and blessing in the arduous tasks ahead.
Aquino’s address segued to a singing of The
Lord’s Prayer. [12]

— ...So Help Us God: The Presidents of the
Philippines and their Inaugural Addresses, by
J. Eduardo Malaya and Jonathan E. Malaya.

PHOTO: President Manuel L. Quezon delivering
his inaugural address in 1935. Photo courtesy of
the Presidential Museum and Library.

PHOTO: President Jose P. Laurel delivers his
inaugural address, 1943. Photo courtesy of the
Presidential Museum and Library.

r* w

371

ANG PANATA SA PAGBABAGO

At the conclusion of the inaugural address of
President Benigno S. Aquino III, the public
rose to recite the Panata sa Pagbabago. This
was an innovation in the 2010 Inaugural
Ceremonies. It was meant to respond to the
President’s Inaugural Address by volunteers
and the public at large pledging their
support and participation in the democratic
governance of the nation. It is likewise
thematically aligned with the President’s
Social Contract with the Filipino People —
his campaign’s guiding principle and the
Sixteen-Point Agenda for Change followed
by his administration.

Ako ay buong katapatang nanunumpa
Sa ating bansang minamahal at ginagalang
Na aking pagsusumikapang matamo
Ang tunay na pagbabago ng ating bayan
Namamanata ako na tutulong sa ating
pamunuan

Sa pagpapataguyod ng marangal na
pamamahala

At pagpapalakas ng isang lipunang
makatarungan

Na walang palakasan at walang kinikilingan
Na walang lagayan at walang pinapaboran
Gagampanan ko ang lahat ng katungkulan
Ng isang mabuti at matapat na mamamayan
Na kasing tindi ng paghamon ko sa ating
mga pinuno

Na sumunod sa landas na tama at matuwid
Upang mabago ang takbo ng kasaysayan
Na magwakas na ang kahirapan
At maitaguyod natin ang ating kabuhayan
Bilang alay sa ating mga anak at salin-iahi ay
Palaganapin natin at itaguyod
Ang isang SAKDAL LINIS, MARANGAL
at MATAGUMPAY na PILIPINO.

Sa isip, sa salita at sa gawa.

THE SYMBOLIC POSSESSION OF
MALACANAN PALACE

Upon concluding the Panata sa Pagbabago,
the honor guard presented arms and the new
President trooped the line, and was greeted
by the service commanders of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine
National Police. Fie then proceeded to
Malacanan Palace, preceded by a motorized
escort. Outside the gates of Malacanan
Palace, the motorized escort was relieved
by the Presidential Guards to welcome their
new commander-in-chief. [13]

The ritual climbing of the stairs. The
President formally takes possession of the
Palace as his official residence and office, by
climbing the main stairs of the Palace for the
first time as President of the Philippines. This
is a tradition begun by President Manuel L.
Quezon, who was moved by the legend that
Rizal’s mother climbed the stairs on her knees,
to beg for the life of her son. The climbing of
the stairs signifies that the chief executive is
the freely-elected head of the Filipino people,
who is pledged to govern them with justice
in contrast to the colonial governors who
formerly inhabited the Palace. 1141

First cabinet meeting. From 1935 to Martial
Law, Kalayaan Hall (formerly Maharlika
Hall and before that, the Executive Building)
was the official office of the president.
Cabinet meetings were held here (in the
Cabinet, now Roxas, and Council of State,
now Quirino, rooms) from the Quezon to
the Macapagal administrations: among

those who attended cabinet meetings in
this building were Benigno Aquino Sr. as
Secretary of Agriculture in the Quezon
Administration; it is also the building in

372

PHOTO: Manuel L. Quezon ascends the stairs of
Malacanan Palace for the first time as President,
1935. Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum
and Library.

which Benigno Aquino Jr. held office as
presidential assistant to President Ramon
Magsaysay. Cabinet meetings have been held
in the Aguinaldo State Dining Room since
the Marcos administration. [15]

Inaugural reception. This is a reception
for foreign and other dignitaries who wish
to call on the new President. The term vin
d’honneur will is no longer in use, reverting
to the pre-martial law practice of simpler
official receptions. There is also no Inaugural
Ball (the last Inaugural Ball was for the 1981
Marcos inaugural, which was also the last
time the Rigodon de Honor was danced in
the Palace until June 12, 2009, when it was
again danced on June 12 of that year). The
President of the Philippines offers a toast as a
gesture of amity to the nations that maintain
diplomatic relations with the Philippines. 1161

Inaugural concert. Public concerts have been
a feature of inaugurals since the Quirino
administration. A public dance instead of
an Inaugural Ball first took place in the
Magsaysay Inaugural in 1953, and restored
as a practice by presidents since Macapagal in
1961. The last Inaugural Ball, complete with
Rigodon de Honor, was held at Malacanan

Palace in 1981. President Aquino III returned

to his residence at Times Street, Quezon City,

after the Inaugural Concert. 1171

ENDNOTES

[1J Manuel L. Quezon III, “Briefing on the
Inaugural (final update),” Manuel L.
Quezon III (blog), June 19, 2010,
http://www.quezon.ph/2010/06/19/
briefing-on-the-inaugural/.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] J. Eduardo Malaya and Jonathan E.

Malaya, ...So Help Us God: The
Presidents of the Philippines and Their
Inaugural Addresses (Pasig City: Anvil
Publishing, 2004), 8.

[10] “Inaugural Address of President
Benigno S. Aquino III, June 30, 2010,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, http://www.gov.
ph/2010/06/30/inaugural-address-of-
his-excellency-benigno-s-aquino-iii/.

[11] Malaya and Malaya, ...So Help Us
God, 1-2.

[12] Ibid., 3.

[13] Quezon, “Briefing on the Inaugural
(final update),” http://www.quezon.
ph/20 1 0/06/1 9/briefing-on-the-
inaugural /.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

373

Vim D’Hommeur

JUSTIN GATUSLAO AND MARK BLANCO

A traditional morning reception — now
called the “vin d’honneur” (pronounced
“von duh nyur”) — takes place biannually
at Malacanan Palace: first and primarily
to mark the New Year, and second, held
on June 12, to celebrate the anniversary of
Philippine Independence.

As with many official traditions, the practice
of an official reception to mark the New Year
dates to the colonial period. In the United
States, the New Year’s Day reception was
adopted from the British tradition of holding
a New Year’s Day Levee. 111 The British
Monarchs held a reception early in the

374

Malacanan Palace

New Year’s Bay, January 1, 1940

PHOTO: President Manuel L. Quezon and Mrs.
Aurora A. Quezon at the reception line, welcoming
guests to their 1940 “at home.” Photo digitally
colorized by the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office.

afternoon of New Year’s Day. It was carried
over to the colonies of the new world by the
Governors General, as the representative of
the monarch. After American independence,
the practice was continued by George
Washington. The first reception held in the
White House was in 1801 under United
States President John Adams. The practice
at the White House was to open its doors
to any citizen who wanted to pay a visit
to the American chief executive. [2 ' This
tradition was taken up in the Philippines by

the Governors General during the American
colonial period. The last open house held at
the White House was in 1932 under Herbert
Hoover and was discontinued thereafter. [3]

During the American Colonial Period,
Governors General held their receptions in
Malacanan Palace on January 1. After the
completion of the Mansion House in Baguio
City, Governors General resided there during
summer and the holiday season. Thereafter,
the New Year’s Day reception was held
at the lawn of the Mansion House. This
practice continued even when the office
of the Governor General was abolished
and replaced by the office of the High
Commissioner to the Philippines.

When the Commonwealth of the Philippines
was established, two New Year’s Day
receptions were held at the same time each
year: one was hosted by the President of
the Philippines in Malacanan Palace; the
other was hosted by the United States High
Commissioner in the lawn of the Mansion
House in Baguio, until the official residence
of the High Commissioner (now the United
States Embassy) in Roxas Boulevard was
built. The reception always took place on
January 1, because the date had special
significance to the President: under the old
Catholic calendar January 1 is the feast day,
or name day, of people named Manuel.

Back then, the event was called simply
a New Year’s reception; sometimes, an
“at home day.” For example, during the
Commonwealth, invitations would simply
state that the President and First Fady would
be “at home” from the afternoon to early
evening of January 1.

375

After the administrations of Presidents
Quezon and Roxas, the receptions were not
strictly held on the first of January. It was
usually held in the early days of January, and
called variously an “at home day” or an open
house.

President Ramon Magsaysay introduced an
innovation in which, instead of using foreign
liquors to toast with guests, he used Basi, or
Ilocano sugarcane liquor . 141

The annual New Year’s reception was
quite the social event, the traditional “open
house” being an opportunity for high
government officials, former presidential
families, members of Congress, the Judiciary,
the diplomatic corps, and business and
social circles to mingle freely and relatively
informally in the Palace.

After the EDSA People Power Revolution,
the traditional New Year’s reception was
continued, but came to be known from the
administration of President Corazon C.
Aquino onward, as a vin d’honneur. The

term comes from the French practice, which
means “wine of honor.” In the Philippine
context, over the years it has come to be
considered primarily a diplomatic event,
which features a toast exchanged between
the President of the Philippines and the Papal
Nuncio, who is the Dean of the Diplomatic
Corps . 161 (In Catholic countries or those that
formerly belonged to the Spanish Empire, by
tradition, the senior diplomat, or Dean, of
the diplomatic corps is the Papal Nuncio or
ambassador .) 171

The rituals include guests entering the State
Entrance of the Palace and climbing the
main stairs, going into the Reception Hall
where, in the past, a reception line would
have been formed. President Benigno S.
Aquino III follows the practice instituted by
his mother by receiving guests in the Music
Room. From there guests are escorted to the
Rizal Ceremonial Hall. The President of the
Philippines then joins the assembled guests
and proceeds to deliver remarks, concluding
with a toast to the prosperity and well-being
of the Filipino people.

376

PHOTO: President Roxas’s “at home.” Photo
courtesy of President Manuel Roxas Foundation.

PHOTO: President Roxas’s “at home." Photo
courtesy of President Manuel Roxas Foundation.

377

ENDNOTES

[1J F.K. Prochaska, The Eagle and the
Croivn: Americans and the British
Monarchy (New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press, 2008), 21.

[2] John Whitcomb and Claire Whitcomb,

Real Life at the White House: 200
Years of Daily Life at America’s Most
Famous Residence (New York, NY:
Routledge, 2002), 41.

[3] Darryl James Gonzalez, The Children

Who Ran for Congress and the School
Up on the Hill (Santa Barbara, CA:
ABC-CLIO LLC, 2010), 127.

[4] Allyn C. Ryan, RM: A Biographical

Novel of Ramon Magsaysay
(Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Corporation,
2007), 190.

[5] “The President’s Week, 1954, January

9, 1954,” Philippines Free Press,
accessed March 17, 2016, https://
philippinesfreepress.wordpress.
com/1954/01/09/the-presidents-
week-1954/.

[6] “President Aquino leads Vin d’Honneur

in Malacanang,” Office of the
President, January 11, 2013, http://
president.gov.ph/news/president-
aquino-leads-vin-dhonneur-in-
malacanang/.

[7] James-Charles Noonan Jr., The Church

Visible: The Ceremonial Life and
Protocol of the Catholic Church, rev.
ed. (New York, NY: Sterling Ethos,
2012), 72.

378

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION, JOSELITO ARCINAS, COLINE ESTHER CARDENO,
AND SARAH JESSICA WONG

PHOTO: President Benigno S. Aquino III, assisted by Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Chief of
Staff General Gregorio Pio Catapang, Jr., offers a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldiers during
the commemoration of the National Heroes Day at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in Fort Bonifacio, Taguig
City on Monday (August 25, 2015) with the theme: “Bayaning Pilipino: Lumalaban para sa Makatwiran at
Makabuluhang Pagbabago.” Photo courtesy of Robert Vinas/Malacanang Photo Bureau.

The celebration of National Heroes Day
began during the American Colonial Period.
The Philippine Legislature, then dominated
by Filipino leaders who represented the
national aspiration for independence, first

enacted the holiday into law through Act
No. 3827 on October 28, 1931. The Act
declared the last Sunday of August of every
year an official national holiday. However,
as far as research has been able to determine,

379

November 30, while already celebrated as
Bonifacio Day by virtue of Act No. 2946
s. 1921, [11 was also held to commemorate
anonymous heroes of the nation in that
same year. 121 It appears that the practice of
celebrating Bonifacio Day concurrently with
the commemoration of Filipino heroes on
November 30 was carried on in subsequent
years. For example, on November 30, 1936,
President Manuel L. Quezon himself was
the guest of honor at the National Heroes
Day celebration held at the University of the
Philippines. 131

While National Heroes Day and Bonifacio
Day were celebrated on the same day, there
were separate celebrations. 141151 The custom
then was to hold the annual formal military
review of the cadets (ROTC) of the University
of the Philippines, in the presence of officials
from the three branches of government 161
while another celebration was held at the
Bonifacio Monument in Caloocan. 171 It was
on November 30, 1941, the last National
Heroes Day commemoration before the
beginning of the Second World War in the
Pacific, that President Manuel L. Quezon
broke protocol and addressed the cadets
assembled in the military review at the
University of the Philippines, informing
them and those present about the precarious
situation of the country amidst the Japanese
encroachment in neighboring countries. 181

During the Japanese Occupation of the
country, the holiday was still celebrated on
the same day. President Jose P. Laurel signed
Executive Order No. 20 on March 20, 1942,
which set the National Heroes Day on the
thirtieth of November. The following year,
in an act of silent defiance, President Laurel
chose Mount Samat Cemetery in Bataan

PHOTO: President Manuel L. Quezon with his son
Manuel "Nonong” Quezon Jr. at the wreath laying
ceremony in honor of Andres Bonifacio and other
Filipino heroes, on November 30, 1939, National
Heroes Day. Photo from the Quezon Family Collection.

as the place of the National Heroes Day
commemoration on November 30, 1943,
implicitly commemorating the Filipino and
American forces defeated in that very place
in Bataan, and in Corregidor by the Japanese
on April 3 and May 6, 1942 respectively.
President Laurel’s speech was delivered by
Minister of the Interior Arsenio Bonifacio, in
which the president honored “them on this
day which national custom has consecrated
to the memory of those who knew how to
sacrifice the interests of self and the rich
pleasures of living for the sake of the dignity
and welfare of the greatest number.”

On November 30, 1945, the year the
Japanese Occupation and the Second World
War in the Pacific ended, President Sergio

380

Osmena delivered a speech on the National
Heroes Day in Capas, Tarlac. This was to
commemorate the town not only as a prison
camp under the occupation, but also as “a
symbol of spiritual resistance, a symbol of
faith.”

In 1952, President Elpidio Quirino reverted
the date of National Heroes Day back
to the last Sunday of August. Through
Administrative Order No. 190, s. 1952, he
appointed Secretary of Education Cecilio
Puton as head of a committee to take charge
of the National Heroes Day celebration,
which took place on August 31, 1952. He
then delivered a speech on the same day at the
Philippine Normal College (now Philippine
Normal University), explaining that the
“change has become necessary because of the
interest from different sectors of our country
to celebrate each hero’s anniversary in order
to perpetuate his [Andres Bonifacio’s] name.”

President Corazon C. Aquino’s
Administrative Code of 1987 adopted this in
Executive Order No. 292, Book 1, Chapter
7, which provided for a list of regular
holidays and nationwide special days, setting
National Heroes Day as a regular holiday
celebrated on the last Sunday of August. The
Administrative Code provides that the list of
holidays and special days may be “modified
by law, order or proclamation.”

On July 24, 2007, President Gloria

Macapagal-Arroyo signed into law, Republic
Act No. 9492, which amended Book 1,
Chapter 7 of the Administrative Code.
By virtue of Republic Act No. 9492, the
celebration of National Heroes Day thus falls
on the last Monday of August. The rationale
behind the move was President Arroyo’s

“Holiday Economics” programme, 191 which
aimed to reduce work disruptions by moving
holidays to the nearest Monday or Friday of
the week, thus allowing for longer weekends
and boosting domestic leisure and tourism. 1101

Our national heroes are often portrayed
as a pantheon of distinct and powerful
personalities who have managed to get their
names published in our history books by
virtue of their words or actions. But National
Heroes Day specifies no hero; the law that
put into practice the celebration does not
name a single one. And this lack of specifics
offers an opportunity to celebrate the bravery
of not one, not a few, but all Filipino heroes
who have braved death or persecution for
home, nation, justice, and freedom.

381

ENDNOTES

[1J Mona Lisa Quizon, “Why celebrate
Bonifacio Day?” Philippine Daily
Inquirer, November 30, 2010, accessed
August 28, 2015, http://newsinfo.
inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/
view/2010 11 30-306095/Why-
celebrate-Bonifacio-Day.

[2] “Anonymous heroes are remembered,”

The Tribune, December 1, 1931, 1.

[3] “Thousand pay homage to heroes,” The

Tribune, December 1, 1936, 1.

[4] Quezon Family Collection, Philippine

Press Clippings Volume VII 1940-
1945, accessed on August 28,

2015, https ://archive . org/s tream/

PhilippinePressClippings2/PHIL-

PRESS-CLIPPING-VOL.-VII-1940-

1945#page/nl31/mode/2up/search/

Heroes.

[5] “Thousands pay homage to heroes,” 1.

[6] John F. Hurley, Wartime Superior in the

Philippines: 1941-1945 (Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila University Press,
2005), 6-7.

[7] “Thousands pay homage to heroes,” 1.

[8] Hurley, Wartime Superior in the

Philippines, 6-7.

[9] Maria Cherry Lyn S. Adolfo, “Crafting

Filipino Leisure: Tourism Programmes
in the Philippines,” in Domestic
Tourism in Asia: Diversity and
Divergence, ed. Shalini Singh (London
and Sterling, VA: Earthscan, Inc.,
2009), 249.

[10] Philippine Center for Investigative
Journalism, “Under the presidency
of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the
celebration of many national holidays
was moved to the nearest Monday or
Friday to allow for extended or long
weekends,” MoneyPolitics: A Citizen’s
Guide to Elections, Public Funds,
and Governance in the Philippines,
accessed on August 24, 2015, http://
moneypolitics.pcij.org/2014/02/
under-the-presidency-of-gloria-
macapagal-arroyo-the-celebration-of-
many-national-holidays-was-moved-to
the-nearest-monday-or-friday-to-allow
for-extended-or-long-weekends/.

Malaeafian Palace Prowlers:
Ghosts, Elememtals, and.
other Phantasmagoric Tales

SASHA MARTINEZ

A prominent photo spread in the definitive
Malacahan Palace: The Official Illustrated
History features a panoramic view of
the Palace’s State Entrance, with the
accompanying balete tree (strangler fig) —
and, it seems, the headless figure of one of the
members of the Presidential Security Group.
The image has sparked much speculation,
feeding suspicions of the Palace being the
ultimate haunted house — and prompting
many of the book’s owners to splay its pages
open to visitors. However, when asked if

he had truly captured a specter on film,
photographer Wig Tysmans offered a simple
explanation: long exposure. The now-
immortalized security personnel must have
held his pose throughout the exposure, only
to move his head before it ended.

Despite more innocuous rationales, the
Palace remains rife with such supposed
hauntings. The conservative supposition of
the probable age of Malacanan Palace places
its beginnings from 1746-1750. Being thus a

383

structure so old and so laden with history —
having gone through centuries’ worth of
residents, countless skirmishes, a handful
of wars, reconstructions, and the myriad
influences of culture — almost ensures the
proliferation of ghost stories about the
Palace. From sightings of mysterious faceless
personages, to the mainstay kapre puffing
away his cigar on the famous balete tree
declared a National Heritage Tree in 2011;
to the ghosts of dead Presidents roaming the
state rooms and their househelp haunting
the balconies and halls.

Even soothsayers have made occult cameo
appearances in the Palace, as Carlos Quirino
recounts,

a local soothsayer stopped at the Palace
gates to tell the guards that a severe typhoon
would destroy the Palace should any of
them “wear a beard.” The tale was repeated
to Mrs. Taft who, apparently to forestall the
manghuhula or sorcerer, forbade the servants
from growing beards— even scraggly

mustaches that some of the muchachos had
affected. The prohibition apparently worked,
for the severe typhoons that rainy season
failed to destroy the Palace.

It comes, as they say, with the territory. As
Linda Garcia-Campos, only child of President
Carlos P. Garcia, noted, “Malacanang is an
old house. And it creaks. And my first night
there, whenever I heard a creaking, I would
wonder: Is this it, is this the ghost?” Fertile
imaginations of its residents and the Palace’s
ominous decor notwithstanding, we strive
to argue, of course, for more grounded
explanations.

SUPERNATURAL SIGHTS AND SOUNDS IN
THE PALACE

United States President Dwight D.
Eisenhower, principal aide of Field Marshal
Douglas MacArthur, and assigned an office
in the Executive Building (in what is now
the Presidential Broadcast Studio where
Secretary Jesse M. Robredo’s wake was held
in Kalayaan Hall) by President Manuel L.
Quezon, returned to Manila on a State Visit
to President Carlos P. Garcia and recounted
that during his stay, a mysterious valet
brought snacks to his room at midnight.
Decades later, President Ferdinand E. Marcos
would tell his children of a shadowed aide
haunting the room the President used as his
study, responding to neither summons nor
the physical constraints of solid walls.

>: U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhi
i/as part of the Presidential Broad'
which was recently used for the I
! of Secretary of the Interior and L

In fact, a wealth of ghost stories are provided
by the Marcoses — they, after all, stayed in
the Palace for 20 years. Presidential son and
now-Senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr. relates
how other ghosts may be the lost souls of
people slain during World War II; adding

384

PHOTO: President Ferdinand E. Marcos and Vice
President Fernando Lopez in the Presidential
Study. Photo courtesy of the Presidential Museum
and Library.

that the Japanese Army used Malacanang
as headquarters. Another thread is of
an American chaplain known as Father
Brown — who could be malicious or
benevolent, depending on who was relating
the tale — who had been supposedly killed
by Japanese troops. However, the Japanese
Army had used what is now the United
States Embassy as their headquarters.

Former Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye
relates an amusing tale of creeping suspicion
of supernatural ongoings — the sound of
footsteps, the intuition that one is being
followed — as he wove his way in and out of
the halls of the Palace:

“My first view of The Thing from a distance
was of a white-haired man wearing a dark
suit. The Thing must have sensed my presence
because he immediately turned around. He
said: ‘Toting, paano ba lumabas dito?’ [Toting,
how do you get out of here?] Secretary Raul
Gonzalez seemed as relieved as I was.”

Raul S. Gonzalez, whose father, Arturo
M. Gonzalez, was the first Engineer of
Malacanan Palace, and who later became
Press Secretary of President Diosdado
Macapagal, grew up in the Palace. In a
series of articles published in the 1990s, he
recounted:

The house we moved into was a green and
white Swiss chalet tucked into a corner
formed by the Pasig and the wall that
separated Malacanang from what is now
St. Jude’s and environs. It had four big
bedrooms; wide, wide windows; and a long,
long porch where, in the dark of many a night,

I sat enraptured by and shivering from tales
told by our cleaning man, Mang Bernabe,
shriveled and stooped from serving too many
Spanish masters and American governors—
tales about disembodied friars in cowls and
sutanas intoning the litany as they plodded
along the Palace corridors, about great balls
of fire circling the old majestic rubber tree
that once stood on what used to be the Palace
parade field, about an eccentric European
(Kaminski...) who once stayed in this very
same chalet and from this very porch, even
in foulest weather, scanned the heavens for
some nameless planets beyond the reach of
the sun.

Incidentally, the chalet where Engineer
Gonzales lived, and its twin, where
traditionally, the commander of the
Presidential Guards lived, from the Quezon
to Marcos administrations, was demolished
before martial law when President Marcos
enlarged the Administration Building
(renamed Mabini Hall by President Fidel V.
Ramos).

385

THE CROUCHING CHILDREN AND
PHANTOM FLOWERS OF MABINI HALL

Office of the President employees in Mabini
Hall are fond of recounting the apparition
of a woman dressed in a black frilly dress,
looking out the window at the Pasig
River, or seated at one of the desks in the
Correspondence Office. Other employees
recount moving chairs in the Correspondence
Office and the smell of flowers wafting
in the air, or hearing sounds of typing,
children playing — or even the sound of

someone eating chicharron. Across the hall
is the Information and Communications
Technology Office of the Department of
Science and Technology where a person
claiming to possess clairvoyant powers is
said to have seen an old lady stopping the
flow of sand on an old hourglass. On the
third floor, men’s restroom of Mabini Hall, a
boy crouches in a corner with his head bent
down.

Oddly enough, despite at least two killings
on the premises: the shooting of Engineer

386

Gonzalez and two others by a Presidential
Guard run amok, and supposedly, of a
Marcos loyalist during the EDSA People
Power Revolution, no stories identified with
these individuals has gained currency.

On the other hand, the New Executive
Building, which was the original home of
the San Miguel Brewery, has two ghosts
associated with it: that of children — a little
girl following people around and a little boy
moaning and crying at the passage leading to
the guesthouse. There has also been mention
of sightings of a Chinese gentleman standing
still at the corner on one of the rooms on
the third floor. The most unusual story is
of a Doppleganger — a shapeshifter — which
impersonates people to confuse others,
particularly from dusk to late at night.

PHOTO: The Music Room was originally the First
Lady's library. It was converted into a Music Room
during the Quirino Administration. Photo courtesy
of the Presidential Museum and Library.

Its current resident, President Benigno S.
Aquino III, relates how the palace guards
have spoken of “pianos [that] start playing
by themselves” and of the sound of footsteps
marauding the halls. The Music Room is
particularly fertile ground for hauntings, it
seems. (One of the previous incarnations
of the Music Room was that it was used
as a bedroom during the Spanish Colonial
Period.)

In Nick Joaquin’s history of the Palace, Irene
Marcos shared a story about “the Fabian de
la Rosa painting of a cellist which hangs in
the Music Room. On certain nights the sound
of a cello playing can be heard in the room
underneath. And one guard even swears he
has seen the cellist in that painting turning
one of the music pages.”

THE PRESIDENTIAL GHOSTS

The ghost of President Manuel L. Quezon
seems to be haunting a host of rooms and
structures. He was reportedly sighted in
Mansion House, the Presidential retreat
in Baguio, colorfully cursing in Spanish.
However, President Quezon never lived
in the Mansion House, using it only for
Cabinet meetings as he preferred his private
residence on Legarda Road.

Closer to home, here is Raul S. Gonzalez
recounting a story told him by his father:

Past midnight of an August day in 1944, Father
tumbled out of bed, wakened by something he
couldn’t then tell which seemed to push him
out of our house and direct his steps toward
the Malacanang garage, a cavernous structure
beside what is now Gate 4. Inside the garage,
he heard sounds of a car door opening and
slamming shut... It was the [Chrysler] of
President Quezon. He looked It over, found
nothing wrong, and went back home to sleep.

A couple of nights later, he rushed to my
mother from where he was listening to his
short-wave radio. “Anching," he said, “the
President is dead."

387

PHOTO: The Malacanan Palace ballroom was
converted into the State Dining Room during the
Quezon administration. It was then rebuilt in 1978.
Above, the State Dining Room during a luncheon
tendered by President Elpidio Quirino for Mrs.
Aurora Aragon Quezon. Photo from the Quezon
Family Collection.

Mr. Quezon died at exactly the same time
Father heard the [Chrysler’s] door opening
and closing. No one would ever be able to
convince him it was not the President he loved
so deeply who summoned him from his sleep
to his favorite car.

President Quezon’s ghost has likewise been
sighted in numerous state rooms all over
Malacanan Palace — he was once reportedly
seen by Presidential daughter Imee Marcos
in the Presidential Study, adding that her
father contemplated holding a seance to
summon President Quezon to advise him
concerning troublesome negotiations with
the Americans. Curiously enough, Joaquin,
in his history of Malacanan Palace writes,
“Nonong Quezon [only son of President
Manuel L. Quezon] says he saw none of the
ghosts supposed to haunt the palace; the
horridest happening there that he remembers
is a snake being caught in his room.”
Historian Ambeth Ocampo meantime posits
that President Quezon’s ghost would “[pace]
the Palace during times of crisis,” inspiring

PHOTO: President Manuel Roxas began the
tradition of movie nights. Above, President Roxas
with family and friends, watching a movie in the
State Dining Room. 1946. Photo courtesy of LIFE.

the Marcoses to rebuild the Palace. Other
Palace employees continue to claim that
the lights in the Quezon Executive Office in
Kalayaan Hall spontaneously switch on late
at night.

Upon the deaths of President Manuel Roxas
and Ramon Magsaysay, the househelp
hardly ventured into the Aguinaldo State
Dining Room given their fear of ghosts —
some claimed to have seen the deceased
Presidents “leisurely puffing a long cigar at
the cabecera or head of the dining table.”
Curiously, of the two only President Roxas
was a known smoker.

President Roxas, though, has also spooked
the Marcoses. Nick Joaquin relates how
the Marcos children would avoid the State
Dining Room, as this was where the body
of President Roxas had reportedly lain in
state. Imelda Marcos would insist that one
of her children escort her to the bathroom
whenever they ventured near the State
Dining Room. However, the lying-in-state of
President Roxas — as with other Presidents

388

who lay in state — was held at the Rizal
Ceremonial Hall.

Senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr. even relates
more hauntings in the State Dining Room,
curiously enough, as this was the site of
pajama parties and movie viewing — a
tradition began by President Roxas himself.

Ruby Roxas, daughter of President Manuel
Roxas, has attested:

By the way, if there are ghosts in Malacanang,
my mother [First Lady Trinidad Roxas] would
have felt their presence because she is the
nervous type, but fortunately, none of us are
superstitious. But the househelp were always
talking about a woman in white, with long hair,
wandering about at night.

the Quezons’ Chinese cook, Aching, was
said to have died of a heart attack. So there
was supposed to be a Chinese ghost on that
pasillo.”

HIS NAME IS BROWN-MR. BROWN

Juliet Labog-Javellana’s article for the
Philippine Daily Inquirer, “Malacanang is
country’s top haunted house,” enumerates
a handful of the ghost stories from those
who have stayed in it, including its current
resident President Aquino III. President
Aquino himself — who resides in Bahay
Pangarap — has commented on the ominous
atmosphere of the Palace, and the years of
related stories on hauntings, beginning with
a looming balete tree in front of the state
entrance.

Trusted aides and attendants of the
Presidents have likewise haunted the Palace,
from a “phantom Chinese valet from the
days of President Roxas who walks the long
narrow corridors.” Senator Marcos relates a
tale passed on by “a guest from Italy [who]
recounted being awakened by a Chinese
servant at around 3am and [had been] told
to attend Mass with the Marcoses. The first
family asked around and was told that the
ghost had been known to appear as early as
the time of President Manuel Roxas.”

Vicky Quirino, daughter of President Elpidio
Quirino who served as his First Lady,
relates, “The wing we occupied was said
to be haunted. There was a certain balcony
where scary noises were supposed to be
heard at night. And behind the bedrooms
was a pasillo going to the laundry room and
the tableware closet, and on that corridor

Coincidentally, it’s not the first time the
balete tree has fed the imagination of
Filipinos as it has housed many of the local
enkantos of lore. Neither is it surprising
that a number of these trees are referred to
as strangler figs known to start upon other
trees, later entrapping them entirely until the
host tree is dead.

PHOTO: President Benigno S. Aquino III before the
balete tree said to be the home of a kapre. The balete
was proclaimed a National Heritage Tree in 2011.
Photo courtesy of the Malacanang Photo Bureau.

389

The Palace balete tree is said to be home
to a kapre, calmly puffing cigar, [Quirino]
recounts one such story from previous
residents of the Palace.

The story goes that household aide Mariano
Dacuso, now deceased, was relaxing and
reading the papers in the Tea House (where
a Mosque now stands) when he found
himself being lifted along with his chair.
“He was lifted almost to the ceiling so he
told the kapre, ‘Please put me down.’ Then
he ran to us,” Rozon said. Then there was
a cabbie who got the scare of his life when
he asked for a light and looked up to see
the kapre chomping on a cigar. Shaking
in fear, the cabbie ran to the quarters of
the servants, who told him he had found
Mr. Brown. Rozon also said that when the
social secretary’s staff worked overtime
typing letters, they would hear someone else
typing in the next room, which was empty.
“Whenever something mysterious happened,
it was always blamed on Mr. Brown,” he
said.

Elmer Navarro, who lived in the old servants’
quarters as a child, said the kapre was
“feared even by the military.” He recalled,
“Sometimes, you could see smoke wafting
from the tree.”

A passage from Nick Joaquin recounts
another kapre, offered by the Marcos
children: “A more malevolent one is an
enormous kapre who inhabits the balete
tree just outside the main entrance. On dark,
muggy nights, security men were sometimes
startled to see their fellow guards frantically
running about the grounds as though
being chased by some invisible demon. The

victims claimed later the gigantic kapre had
wakened them, then had gone about gleefully
dropping ashes from his enormous cigar on
their heads.” One of the Palace help during
the Commonwealth, the late Anastasia de
Joya Calalang, who lived in the servants’
quarters (converted by the Marcoses into
the Premier Guest House in 1975), to her
dying day insisted she had been chased by
the kapre one dark night as she went home,
remarking on his coal-red eyes.

Having begun with a photograph, we end
with a photograph. From Spanish times
to the beginning of the Commonwealth,
Malacanan Palace was a typical Bahay na
Bato: the bedrooms and principal state room
were on the second floor, and the ground
level was a silong. In the first years of the

PHOTO: A ghost captured on film? The shadowy
figure on the left caught on camera by a guest at
Heroes Hall. Photo courtesy of Malacanang Photo
Bureau.

390

Commonwealth, President Quezon had the
silong transformed into what he intended to
be a clubhouse for entertaining members of
the National Assembly; it came to be known
as the Social Hall and during the Macapagal
Administration, it was further embellished
and named Heroes Hall. In the 1978-1979
rebuilding of Malacanan Palace, it was
rebuilt and fully enclosed.

In 2010, during one palace event, a staff
member of Raffy Nantes posed for a
photograph in Heroes Hall using his mobile
phone and was startled to see a ghostly figure
hovering behind him clad in pre-hispanic
garb. What could simply be a pattern of
shadows in low light conditions taken with
a low-resolution phone camera, has gained
fame as a photo of a ghostly apparition.
As Robert L. Ripley, who once visited
Governor-General Theodore Roosevelt Jr. in
Malacanan Palace might have said, “Believe
it... Or not.”

391

and the Departed

SASHA MARTINEZ AND NASTASIA TYSMANS

[This essay was originally published on the Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines
website in commemoration of the All Saints’ and All Souls’ holidays, November 2012, and
has since been updated]

In commemoration of Undas, the Presidential Museum and Library offers a comprehensive
diagram of the cemeteries and memorial shrines in Metro Manila and surrounding areas,
including the specific graves and markers that house the remains of key historical figures,
including Philippine Presidents and heroes of the Philippine Revolution.

UBINGAN NG
MG A BAYANI

LEGEND:

PASIG

CfTY

MANILA NORTH CKMKTKRY

assn

1. Himlayang Pilipino

2. Banlat Road Tandang Sora

3. Quezon Memorial Circle

4. Manila North Cemetery
La Loma Cemetery
Chinese Cemetery

5. San Agustin Church, Intramuros

6. Rizal Park

7. Paco Cemetery

8. Manila South Cemetery

9. Libingan ng mga Bayani

10. Heritage Park

11. Manila Memorial Park

tf . l

OUR HERITAGE AND THE DEPARTED
A CEMETERIES TOUR

All photos courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

392

IICATIONS DfVnOfMFNT

ILOCOS NORTE Ferdinand Marcos

Our heritage and the departed:

A CEMETERIES TOUR

Emilio Aguinaldo

KAWIT, CAVITE Marja Agoncj||o Aguina|do

ANGONO, RIZAL

Carlos “Botong” Francisco

r i

Lucio San Pedro

CALAMBA, LAGUNA

(Francisco Mercado

TANAUAN, BATANGAS

Apolinario

Mabini

Teodora Alonso

Jose P.
Laurel

MANILA NORTH CEMETERY

Carved out from the La Loma Cemetery
in response to its Catholic exclusivity, the
originally secular Cementerio del Norte
or the Manila North Cemetery is now
considered the biggest in Metro Manila.
Among the prominent personalities interred
in the cemetery are three Presidents of the
Philippines — Manuel Roxas, Sergio Osmena,
and Ramon Magsaysay. Memorial sites are
also housed in Manila North, among them:
the Boy Scouts Cenotaph, in honor of the
24 Boy Scouts killed in a plane crash — the
Philippine contingent to the 1 1th World Scout
Jamboree of 1963; those for the Thomasites,
a group of American teachers sent to the
Philippines by the United States government
in 1901; and the Mausoleo de los Veteranos
de la Revolucion, for those who fought for
the Philippine Revolution and the Philippine-
American War.

PRESIDENTS INTERRED IN
MANILA NORTH CEMETERY

The first presidential burial in Manila
North Cementery was of President Manuel
L. Quezon’s. On August 1, 1979, his bones
were transferred to the Quezon Memorial
Circle; 111 his wife’s followed on April 28,
2005. President Quezon’s only son is now
buried in his father’s old tomb. The Quezon
tomb became the model for the tombs of
Presidents Roxas (until it was remodeled in
the 1990s) and President Magsaysay, and for
other tombs such as that of Fernando Poe Jr.

393

PHOTO: Tomb of President Manuel Roxas.

PRESIDENT SERGIO OSMENA

First Speaker of the First Philippine Assembly
and then of the House of Representatives,
then the first Senate President pro tempore.
He became the first Vice-President to
assume the presidency after the death of
his predecessor; President Osmena became
the second President of the Commonwealth
of the Philippines after taking his oath
in Washington, D.C. on August 1, 1944.
President Osmena died on October 19,
1961. [2] Republic Act No. 4840 mandates
that the Ayuntamiento Building, which had
been rebuilt, would be named as the Osmena
Memorial Building.

PRESIDENT MANUEL ROXAS

The second president buried at the North
Cemetery, he served as the third and last
President of the the Commonwealth of
the Philippines and as the first President

of the Third Republic. President Manuel
Roxas passed away unexpectedly in Clark,
Pampanga on April 15, 1948, without
finishing his term. He was succeeded by
President Elpidio Quirino on April 17, 1948.
[31 First Lady Trinidad de Leon Roxas, who
died on June 25, 1995 is buried in the same
rotonda as her husband.

Also buried in the same rotunda as his father
and mother, is Senator Gerardo Roxas,
who was a key opposition leader against
the Marcos dictatorship. He sought the
Vice Presidency unsuccessfully in the 1965
election against incumbent Vice President
Fernando Lopez, losing by less than one
percent of the vote. Senator Roxas died on
April 19, 1982. [4]

Gerry Roxas’ son, Representative Gerardo
Roxas Jr., died on April 4, 1993. He was the

394

youngest Representative of the 8th Congress
representing the 1st District of Capiz
alongside the oldest member Rep. Cornelio
Villareal of the 2nd District of Capiz.

PRESIDENT RAMON MAGSAYSAY

The third President to be buried in the North
Cemetery and the third President who passed
away in office. President Magsaysay was
killed in a tragic plane crash in March 17,
1957. [i| Also buried in the same plot are First
Lady Luz Magsaysay, and the president’s
brother, Senator Genaro Magsaysay.

PROMINENT FIGURES
INTERRED IN MANILA NORTH
CEMETERY:

SENATOR MARIANO JESUS CUENCO

He was the leader of the Senate and from
the Province of Cebu, he served for a total
of 2 years as Senate President but was one
of the casualties of the Liberal Party rout in
the 1951 election falling halfway through the
term of President Elpidio Quirinod 61 Senator
Cuenco died on February 25, 1964.

SENATOR GENARO MAGSAYSAY

He was a former Senator of the Philippines
and Representative of the Zambales. Died on
December 25, 1978.

SENATOR QUINTIN PAREDES

He was a statesman, served as Philippine
Solicitor General, Speaker pro tempore of
the House of Representatives from 1929 to
1931. He died on July 30, 1973.

SENATOR CLARO M. RECTO

He was a poet, intellectual, oppositionist, and
considered one of the foremost exponents of
Nationalism. He died on October 2, 1960.

395

FRANCIS BURTON HARRISON

He was the American Governor General
from 1913-1921 of the Philippines, noted
for his Filipinization policy. He was made
an honorary Filipino Citizen by an Act of
the National Assembly. Harrison was an
adviser to Presidents Quezon and Quirino,
developing the initial arguments for the
Philippine claim on Sabah made during
the Quirino administration. His love of the
country led to his final instruction to be
buried in the Philippines. Buried in the North
Cemetery in 1957, his tomb was later moved
to a more prominent spot in the 1990s.

CARMEN PLANAS

She was the first elected female councilor
and a prominent prewar oppositionist.

TOMAS MORATO SR.

The first Mayor of Quezon City, appointed
by President Manuel L. Quezon on 1939.
He subsequently served as representative of
Quezon Province.

PANCHO VILLA

He was born Francisco Guilledo, was a
professional boxer, the first Filipino holder
of the World Flyweight title belt. He died at
23, on July 14, 1925.

396

FELIX RESURRECCION HIDALGO

He was a hero of the Propaganda Movement
and one of the two artistic geniuses hailed
by Rizal, for his prize-winning 1884 painting
Las Virgenes Cristianas Expuestas al
Populacho or The Christian Virgins Exposed
to the Populace . [71

NATIONAL ARTISTS OF THE
PHILIPPINES INTERRED IN THE
MANILA NORTH CEMETERY:

Ronald Allan Kelley Poe, also known as

FERNANDO POE JR.

JOSE CORAZON DE JESUS, who also wrote
under the pseudonym Huseng Batute, and
writer of the lyrics of the nationalist anthem,
“Bay an Ko

MA. ATANG DELA RAMA, known as the
“Queen of the Kundiman.”

GROUP PLOTS AT THE MANILA
NORTH CEMETERY:

MAUSOLEO DE LOS VETERANOS DE LA
REVOLUCION

It was meant to be the pantheon to the
heroes of the Revolution, built under the
auspices of the Veteranos de la Revolucion,

the organization headed by former President
Emilio Aguinaldo. For many decades it
contained the tombs of many notables but

397

over recent decades, many of these remains
have been transferred elsewhere. It remains a
National Shrine, and is a favorite structure of
occultists who note the many Masonic and
other symbols embedded in its architecture.
Designed by Architect Arcadio Arellano and
inaugurated on May 30, 1920.

The BOY SCOUTS CENOTAPH, in honor of
the 24 Boy Scouts killed in a plane crash —
the Philippine contingent to the 11th World
Scout Jamboree of 1963. [SI

AMERICAN TEACHERS (THOMASITES)

American public schoolteachers who came
to the Philippines on board the USS Thomas
in 1901. The Jewish Cemetery is also in the
North Cemetery.

MANILA SOUTH CEMETERY

Established in 1925, at the southern part
of the City of Manila. The Manila South
Cemetery has an estimated total capacity
of 52,234 graves; President Elpidio Quirino
used to be the leading name of the notables
interred here.

PROMINENT FIGURES INTERRED
IN MANILA SOUTH CEMETERY:

PRESIDENT ELPIDIO QUIRINO

The sixth President of the Philippines Elpidio
Quirino was second man to assume the
Presidency after the untimely demise of his
predecessor. President Quirino’s wife and
three children, mother-in-law, and brother
were massacred by the Japanese during the
Battle of Manila in February 1945 — leaving
only himself, his daughter Victoria, and
son Tommy as survivors. A poignant story

recounts how President Quirino loaded the
corpses of his family members on a plank and
ferried them toward the Estero de Paco over
four days. On February 29, 2016, President
Quirino’s remains were reinterred at the
Libingan ng mga Bayani in commemoration
of his 60th death anniversary.

Other prominent individuals interred at the
Manila South Cemetery are as follows:

MAYOR RAMON BAGATSING died on
February 14, 2006 was the longest serving
Mayor of Manila, from 1971 to 1986. He
was a survivor of the Bataan Death March of

398

1941 and the bombing of the Plaza Miranda
in 1971, where he lost his left leg. He became
known as the only disabled person and
Indian-Filipino to serve as mayor.

MAYOR LEON GUINTO died on July 10,
1962, and was the former governor of
Tayabas Province, and wartime Mayor of
Greater Manila (the precursor of Metro
Manila).

AMBASSADOR RAFAELITA SORIANO was

a noted diplomat and historian, as well as
an exponent of Kapampangan history and
culture. He died on January 1, 2007.

SENATOR LOPE K. SANTOS died on May
1, 1963. Santos is more popularly known
as a poet and was the first chairman of the
Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino. He was also
a Senator of the Philippines, Governor of
Nueva Vizcaya, and Governor of Rizal.

LUCRESIA KASILAG, National Artist for
Music, died on August 16, 2008. Kasilag
also served as the president of the Cultural
Center of the Philippines and was among the
pioneers of the renowned Bayanihan Dance
Company.

LA LOMA CEMETERY

Toward the end of the Spanish Colonial
period, the city government of Manila opened
Campo Santo de La Loma or the La Loma
Cemetery, which then served as the foremost
Catholic cemetery of the time. As such, it is
now the oldest cemetery in Manila still in use.
The area was also called “Paang Bundok,”
and this was where Jose Rizal had wished
to be buried. Unfortunately, in Rizal’s time,

La Loma refused burial to non-Catholics
and Filipino insurgents. La Loma likewise
served as one of the Japanese execution sites
during World War II. A Japanese artillery
gun remains within the premises. A shortlist
of prominent figures interred in La Loma
Cemetery:

FELIPE AGONCILLO, known as the first
Filipino diplomat for going to Paris and
trying to plead the Philippine cause to the
representatives of Spain and the United
States during the talks for the treaty of Paris.

MARCELA AGONCILLO, known as the
woman who sewed the first Philippine Flag.

CAYETANO ARELLANO, the first and
longest-serving Chief Justice of the
Philippines. Arellano was Chief Justice from
1901 to 1920.

VICTORINO MAPA, the Second Chief
Justice of the Philippines. Mapa also served
as Secretary of Justice in the Cabinet of
Governor-General Francis Burton Harrison.

MANILA CHINESE CEMETERY

The second oldest cemetery in Manila,
and was designated as the resting place for
Chinese citizens denied burial in Catholic
cemeteries — primarily the La Loma
Cemetery — during the Spanish Colonial
Period. The cemetery was site of numerous
executions during the Second World War —
among them, of Girls Scouts Founder Josefa
Llanes Escoda, and of Boy Scouts of the
Philippines founder and Hero of Bataan-and
also the first Filipino graduate of West Point-
General Vicente Lim.

399

IAVOTAS

CALOOCAN CITY

IALOMA

CEMETERY

NORTH

CEMETERY

Tondo

North

Port

Sampaloc

Quiapo

LIBINGAN NG
MGA BAYANI

The Libingan ng mga Bayani was formerly
known as the Republic Memorial Cemetery
established by the Philippine Government in
1947, as a tribute to the Filipino soldiers who
fought and died in World War II. In 1954,
Philippine President Ramon Magsaysay
rededicated the cemetery and renamed it
as the Libingan ng mga Bayani. 191 In 1967,
President Ferdinand E. Marcos reserved 142
hectares from the Fort Bonifacio Military
Reserve (formerly known as Fort McKinley)
in consideration for the Libingan to serve not
only as a cemetery for military personnel but
also as a national shrine for fallen heroes.
As an official cemetery it also includes areas
reserved for prominent Filipinos who have
served in the government, such as an area
for presidents and vice presidents, general

officers of the armed forces, jurists, members
of the legislature and National Artists and
Scientists.

Presently, Libingan ng mga Bayani provides
grave and interment services for military
men who died in the line of duty or who

400

were honorably discharged. Libingan is
also open as final resting place for former
Philippine Presidents, Filipino Veterans,
notable Government Statesmen, Dignitaries
and National Artists.

PRESIDENTS INTERRED IN
LIBINGAN NG MGA BAYANI:

PRESIDENT CARLOS P. GARCIA

The eighth President of the Philippines,
former Governor of Bohol, and former
Secretary of Foreign Affairs. He was the
third President who assumed the position
after the death of his predecessor. Garcia was
an exponent of the Filipino First policy.

PRESIDENT DIOSDADO MACAPAGAL

The ninth President of the Philippines.
Diosdado Macapagal was the only President
to serve exactly one term in the third
Republic. He moved Independence Day to
June 12.

PRESIDENT ELPIDIO QUIRINO

The sixth President of the Philippines. He was
re-interred at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in
commemoration of his 60th anniversary on
January 29, 2016.

PROMINENT FIGURES INTERRED
IN LIBINGAN NG MGA BAYANI:

• Vice President Salvador H. Laurel

• Former Chief Justice Claudio
Teehankee Sr.

• Former Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Carlos P. Romulo

• Former Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro

• Former Chief Justice Enrique Fernando

• Former Senate President Arturo M.
Tolentino

Carlos P Garcia

PILiDEKT IP TUI flCPUlLiC *f ** PULmCS
IM7 - 1**1

Fust Pksstuxt ip tw 1*11
COBSTTrUTlINii. rjWCftTON

• Former Undersecretary of National
Defense Manuel Salientes

• Former Secretary of National Defense
Alejo Santos

• Former Secretary of National Defense
Angelo Reyes

• Former Secretary of National Defense
Ernesto Mata

• Former Secretary of National Defense
Rafael Ileto

• Former Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Bias Ople

401

• South Commander Romulo Espaldon

• Presidential Commission on Good
Government Chairperson Heidi Yorac

• Undersecretary of MND Manuel P.
Syquio

• Undersecretary of MND Jose Crisol, Sr.

• Former AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Arturo
Enrile

• Former Congressman Marcial Punzalan Jr.

• Deputy Prime Minister Jose Rono

• Former Ambassador Alejandro Melchor

Jr-

• Publisher Maximo Soliven

• Publisher and journalist Teodoro M.
Focsin Sr.

• Social Security System Administrator
Gilberto Teodoro Sr.

NATIONAL ARTISTS INTERRED
IN LIBINGAN NG MGA BAYANI:

• Fevi Celerio, National Artist for Music
and Fiterature

• Nicomedes Joaquin, National Artist for
Fiterature

• Guillermo E. Tolentino, National Artist
for Visual Arts

• Vicente Manansala, National Artist for
Visual Arts

• Victorio Edades, National Artist for
Visual Arts

• Cesar F. Fegaspi, National Artist for
Visual Arts

• Ang Kiukok, National Artist for Visual
Arts

• Jose T. Joya, National Artist for Visual
Arts

• Feonor Orosa, National Artist for
Dance

• Francisca R. Aquino, National Artist for
Dance

402

• Ernani Cuenco, National Artist for
Music

• Jovita Fuentes, National Artist for
Music

• Antonio J. Molina, National Artist for
Music

• Antonio R. Buenaventura, National
Artist for Music

• Nestor V. M. Gonzales, National Artist
for Literature

• Francisco A. Arcellana, National Artist
for Literature

• Alejandro Roces, National Artist for
Literature

• Carlos L. Quirino, National Artist for
Historical Literature

• Wilfredo Ma. Guerrero, National Artist
for Philippine Theatre

• Gerardo Ilagan de Leon, National Artist
for Cinema

• Ramon O. Valera, National Artist for
Fashion Design

NATIONAL SCIENTISTS
INTERRED IN LIBINGAN NG
MGA BAYANI:

• Dr. Perla Santos Ocampo

• Dr. Francisco Fronda

• Dr. Eduardo A. Quisumbing

• Dr. Geminiano de Ocampo

• Dr. Hilario G. Lara

• Dr. Julian A. Banzon

• Dr. Gregorio T. Velasquez

• Dr. Carmen C. Velasquez

• Dr. Jose Encarnacion Jr.

• Dr. Alfredo C. Santos

• Dr. Luz Oliveros Belardo

• Dr. Pedro Escuro

• Dr. Juan Salcedo

• Dr. Alfredo V. Lagmay

• Dr. Fe del Mundo

PHOTO: Tomb of Levi Celerio, National Artist for
Music and Literature

f'i

Rio

CEL

L E V 1

0’IAl

RECIPIENTS OF THE MEDAL OF
VALOR INTERRED IN LIBINGAN:

• Capt. Desiderio Suson

• Col. Jesus Villamor

• Brig. Gen. Godofredo Juliano

• Capt. Conrado Yap

• Capt. Lolina To Go-Ang

• Second Lt. Jose F. Bandong Jr.

• Mayor Robert Eduardo Lucero

403

MANILA MEMORIAL PARK

Manila Memorial Park was established in
1964 and has since expanded into other sites
all over the Philippines. The combined total
area of its parks are 427 hectares. Among
the prominent personalities interred in the
Sucat park are President Corazon C. Aquino
and Senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr.,
media mogul Eugenio “Geny” Lopez Jr., and
boxing icon Gabriel “Flash” Elorde, who
was the first Filipino World Flyweight title
belt holder.

PROMINENT GOVERNMENT
OFFICIALS INTERRED IN
MANILA MEMORIAL:

PRESIDENT CORAZON C. AQUINO

The First Woman President of the Philippines
and also the first female president in Asia.
She served as the 11th President of the
Philippines and is known as the leader of
the People Power Revolution in 1986, which
restored democracy in the country, ending
the Marcos dictatorship. She died on August
1,2009.

SENATOR BENIGNO S. “NINOY” AQUINO

JR. served as a Senator of the Philippines and
as Governor of Tarlac. He was incarcerated
for 7 years for his opposition of the Marcos
dictatorship and upon his return from the
United States to the Philippines, he was
assassinated at the Manila International
Airport (MIA) on August 21, 1983. The
anniversary of his death is remembered as
Ninoy Aquino Day, a national holiday in the
country.

SENATOR SOTERO LAUREL was the

son of President Jose P. Laurel, and who

ironically served as private secretary of Vice
President then President Sergio Osmena in
the Commonwealth Government in Exile. A
pillar of the Lyceum University established
by his father, he was also a senator in the
post-EDSA Senate, brother to Vice President
Salvador H. Laurel and Speaker Jose B.
Laurel, Jr.

NARCISO RAMOS was the father of President
Fidel V. Ramos. He was Secretary of Foreign
Affairs in the first Marcos administration,
and a pre-war assemblyman who co-
sponsored the bill naming Quezon City.

SENATOR ROBERT BARBERS died on
December 25, 2005. Barbers was a former
Secretary of Interior and Local Government
and also served as a Senator of the Philippines.
Mayor Pablo Cuneta died on June 30, 1998.
He served as a Mayor of Pasay and was the
father of the actress Sharon Cuneta.

CULTURAL ICONS INTERRED
IN MANILA MEMORIAL PARK:

HELEN VELA, one of the hosts of Student
Canteen, and a pioneer in the radio advice
program genre with her show “Lovingly
yours, Helen.”

Mariano Contreras, a.k.a. PUGO
CONTRERAS: One of the famed wartime
duo of Pugo and Togo during the Bodabil
Era, and famous in Philippine comedy up to
the 1970s.

Ma. Lourdes Carvajal, a.k.a. IN DAY
BAD l DAY: Queen of Showbiz Gossip.

BAYANl CASIMIRO, “The Fred Astaire of the
Philippines.”

404

Francisco Bustillos Diaz, a.k.a. PAQUITO
DIAZ.

Jose SurbanChua, a.k.a. DINDO FERNANDO.

Victor Silayan, a.k.a. VIC SILAYAN.

Renato Requiestas, a.k.a. RENE
REQUIESTAS: Comedian.

Ricardo Carlos Yan, a.k.a. RICO YAN:
Matinee idol.

DIOMEDES MATURAN: Crooner.

TEODORO VALENCIA’S column, “Over a
Cup of Coffee,” was the widest-read and
most influential opinion column. He became
a pillar of the Martial Law media.

EUGENIO “GENY” LOPEZ JR., Chairman
Emeritus of ABS-CBN Broadcasting
Corporation.

DODJIE LAUREL, sportscar driver and son
of President Jose P. Laurel.

GABRIEL “FLASH” ELORDE, prominent
Filipino boxer.

PACO CEMETERY (NOW,
PACO PARK)

Paco Cemetery, originally Cementerio
General de Dilao then Cementerio General
de Paco, was built in the suburb of San
Fernando de Dilao. 1101 The construction of
the cemetery began in 1814, and a cholera
epidemic prompted the use of the cemetery
in 1820. The cemetery housed the remains
of Spaniards, indios, and mestizos from

different parishes adjacent Manila, which
included Intramuros, Binondo, Quiapo, San
Miguel, Sta. Cruz, Sampaloc, Tondo, Ermita,
and Manila.

The remains of Jose Rizal were interred
in the cemetery immediately after his
execution in Bagumbayan (now Luneta),
in the ground between the inner and outer
walls; Rizal’s remains were then exhumed
in 1898. The bodies of the Gomburza, three
priests executed in February 1872, were also
buried in Paco, although the exact location
is unknown.

During the World War II, the cemetery
was used by the Japanese as a fort and an
ammunition and central supply depot. Paco
Cemetery was converted into a national park
in 1966; its niches now stand empty and are
no longer used for burials.

HIMLAYANG FILIPINO

Himlayang Pilipino was built in 1976,
on the forest where “Tandang Sora gave
Bonifacio and his men refuge and healing.”
The remains of Tandang Sora herself were
once interred in its grounds. Today, EMILIO
JACINTO — known as the “Brains of the
Katipunan” — counts as among the many
heroes of the Philippine Revolution that are
buried in Himlayang Pilipino. Jacinto wrote
for the Katipunan’s paper, Kalayaan, under
the pseudonym Dimasilaw; he authored the
Kartilya ng Katipunan as well. Jacinto died
of malaria on April 16, 1899 at the age of
24. The monument for Emilio Jacinto in
Himlayang Pilipino was created by the
sculptor Florante Caedo and unveiled on
December 15, 1976. 1111

405

QUEZON MEMORIAL CIRCLE

AGUINALDO SHRINE

The Quezon Memorial Circle is a national
shrine and national park located in Quezon
City, which used to serve as the capital of
the Philippines (1948-1976). The site was
supposed to be the National Capitol in the
original Quezon City plan; President Sergio
Osmena designated it the site for a Memorial
to be built through public donations. Its
construction began in 1952 and finished in
1978, in time for the centennial of the birth
of MANUEL L. QUEZON, first President
of the Commonwealth of the Philippines,
whose remains were transferred to the
Memorial from Manila North Cemetery on
August 19, 1979. The mausoleum contains
the remains of Quezon, and his wife, FIRST
LADY AURORA A. QUEZON . 1121

MARCOS MUSEUM AND
MAUSOLEUM

The Aguinaldo Shrine in Kawit, Cavite marks
the place of the declaration of independence
of the Philippines from Spain on June 12,
1898. Today it serves as a national shrine
and museum where the Philippine flag is
raised on June 12th of each year to celebrate
the Araw ng Kalayaan (Independence Day).
PRESIDENT EMILIO AGUINALDO was
interred in the garden of his home after his
death on February 6, 1964, which he had
donated to the nation on June 12, 1963. 1131

Located in Batac, Ilocos Norte, this houses
the remains of PRESIDENT FERDINAND E.
MARCOS. His remains are currently being
preserved since its arrival in 1992. The
Mausoleum also houses memorabilia of the
late President.

SHRINE

TAN/- 1 -V

The Gat APOLINARIO MABINI Shrine in
Tanauan, Batangas contains a museum
and a library, designed by National Artist

406

for Architecture Juan F. Nakpil. It was
inaugurated by then-Vice President Carlos
P. Garcia and First Lady Luz Banzon-
Magsaysay on July 23, 1956. The remains
of Mabini, originally buried in the Manila
Chinese Cemetery, were transferred to the
Mausoleo de los Veteranos de la Revolucion,
and transferred again to Tanauan in July,
1965.

This was the birthplace and the house of
our National Hero JOSE RIZAL. It was
destroyed during World War II but was
eventually restored by virtue of Executive
Order No. 145, s. 1948 1141 with donations
from school children. President Elpidio
Quirino commission architect Juan F. Nakpil
to rebuild the house considering its original
make. The parents of Jose Rizal, FRANCISCO
MERCADO and TEODORA ALONZO, are
buried here.

AMGQMO, RIZAL

Angono, Rizal, coined as the “Arts Capital
of the Philippines,” is the site of the grave

of the NATIONAL ARTIST FOR VISUAL
ARTS CARLOS “BOTONG” V. FRANCISCO,

who died on March 31, 1969. It houses the
oldest known work of art in the country: the
Angono Petroglyphs.

San Agustin Church is a Roman Catholic
church constructed during the occupation
of the Spaniards in the Philippines. Today
it resides within the walls of Intramuros,
Manila, under the auspices of the Order of
St. Augustine. It was recognized as a World
Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1993 and was
marked as a National Historical Landmark
by the government of the Philippines in 1976.
It houses the tombs of Spanish conquistadors,
Governors-General, other Spanish officials
and archbishops, as well as the remains of
Filipino laypersons. A shortlist of prominent
figures interred in San Agustin Church:

407

MARTIN DE GOITI — Spanish Basque
conquistador who led the expedition sent by
Legazpi in 1569 to conquer Manila; killed in
the expedition that fought Limahong.

MIGUEL LOPEZ DE LEGAZPI —

Conquistador who claimed the Philippines
for Spain, founder of Spanish Manila.

JUAN LUNA — Considered the foremost
Filipino painter of the Propaganda Era
patriot, arrested at the onset of the
Revolution, returned to Spain, member
of the delegation to Washington to assert
Philippine independence, died in Hong Kong
on his way home after the assassination of
his brother, General Antonio Luna.

PEDRO A. PATERNO — Negotiator of
the Pact of Biak-na-Bato, second Prime
Minister of the First Republic, member of
the First Philippine Assembly and Resident
Commissioner to the United States Congress.

TRINIDAD H. PARDO DE TAVERA —

Intellectual, member of the Propaganda
Movement, brother-in-law of Juan Luna.

JUAN DE SALCEDO — Deputy of de Goiti,
succeeded his commander in the fight against
Limahong, died en route to Vigan in 1575.

ENDNOTES

[1J “Quezon Memorial Shrine,” National
Historical Commission of the
Philippines, accessed March 17, 2016,
http ://nhcp .go v. ph/museums/ quezon-
memorial-shrine/.

[2] “Proclamation No. 799, s. 1961,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, October 19, 1961, http://
www.gov.ph/1 961/10/1 9/proclamation-
no-799-s-1961/.

[3] “Inaugural Remarks of President

Quirino after the Demise of President
Roxas, April 17, 1948,” Official
Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, accessed March 17,

2016, http ://www.go v. ph/1948/04/17/
inaugural-remarks-of-president-
quirino-after-the-demise-of-president-
roxas-april-17-1948/.

[4] “Our Founder,” Gerry Roxas

Foundation, accessed March 17, 2016,
http://www.gerryroxasfoundation.org/
aboutus/Our_Founder.

[5] Allyn C. Ryan, RM: A Biographical

Novel of Ramon Magsaysay
(Bloomington, IN: Xlibris, 2007), 272.

[6] Presidential Communications

Development and Strategic Planning
Office, Philippine Electoral Almanac,
rev. and exp. ed. (Manila: PCDSPO,
2015), 84.

[7] Jose Duke Bagulaya, “The Ilustrados

as Literary Critics: Philippine Literary
Criticism under Spanish Rule,” Diliman
Review 54, nos. 1-4 (2007): 45.

[8] “Tragic death of Boy Scouts

remembered,” Philippine Daily
Inquirer, July 28, 2013, http://
newsinfo.inquirer.net/454 1 1 1/tragic -
death-of-boy-scouts-remembered.

408

[9] “Proclamation No. 86, s. 1954,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, October 27, 1954, http://
www.gov.ph/1954/10/27/proclamation-
no-86-s-1954/.

[10] Official Opinions of the Attorney -
General of the Philippine Islands:
Advising the Civil Governor, the Heads
of Departments, and Other Public
Officials in Relation to Their Official
Duties, Volume 6 (Manila: Bureau of
Printing, 1929), 10.

[11] “History,” Himlayang Pilipino,
accessed March 17, 2016, http://
himlayangpilipino.com.ph/about-us/.

[12] “Quezon Memorial Shrine,” http://
nhcp.gov.ph/museums/quezon-
memorial-shrine/.

[13] “General Emilio Aguinaldo Shrine,”
Official Website of the Government
of Cavite, accessed March 17, 2016,
http://www.cavite.gov.ph/home/index.
php/tourism/primary-attraction/
historical-sites.

[14] “Executive Order No. 145, s. 1948,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, June 19, 1948, http://www.
gov.ph/1 948/06/1 9/executive-order-no-
145-S-1948/.

409

atiomal Day of Moumie

MANUEL L. QUEZON III, JOSELITO ARCINAS, COLINE CARDENO,

AND KRISTOFFER PASION

PHOTO: The national flag flies at half-mast in front of Kalayaan Hall, Malacanan Palace, as the nation mourns
for the late Secretary of Interior and Local Government Jesse M. Robredo. Photo courtesy of the Malacanang
Photo Bureau.

1 ' TT MT

410

I. NATIONAL DAY OF MOURNING

There are events of such magnitude that the
nation feels the need to come together as a
community to share grief and demonstrate
solidarity. In his capacity as head of state,
the President can call for a National Day of
Mourning in which the nation’s most familiar
symbol — the national flag — becomes the
emblem of our collective grief by being
displayed at half-mast. It commemorates
events such as a death of both an individual
or a group, a calamity, a battle, or an act of
terrorism that has claimed many lives.

A National Day of Mourning has been
declared at least 42 times in history.

II. CIVILIAN PARTICIPATION DURING A
NATIONAL DAY OF MOURNING

A. WEARING A MOURNING ARMBAND

Individuals can show their solidarity in grief
by wearing a mourning armband — a 3-inch
wide black cloth worn around the left upper
arm. It was originally part of the Western
military tradition, but was adopted by both
military and civilians alike, circa 1820s. [11 It
has become part of the Philippine tradition
even prior to World War II.

III. COLLECTIVE PARTICIPATION OF
FILIPINOS DURING A NATIONAL DAY OF
MOURNING

PHOTO: August 1944, at the Arlington National
Cemetery during the funeral of President Quezon:
President Sergio Osmena (with Executive Secretary
Arturo Rotor hidden behind him) and his War
Cabinet, all wearing the mourning armband:

Col. Manolo Nieto, Secretary of Agriculture and
Natural Resources: Joaquin Elizalde, Resident
Commissioner to the United States; Gen. Basilio
Valdes, Chief of Staff of the Philippine Army and
Secretary of National Defense, Transportation,
and Communications; and Col. Carlos P. Romulo,
Secretary of Public Information. Photo from the
Quezon Family Collection.

with the bereaved families of slain police
officers in the Maguindanao encounter,
asking the public to join in prayer, and for all
government facilities and armed camps to fly
the flag at half-mast.

A. NATIONAL FLAG AT HALF-MAST

Collective manifestations of mourning can
be in the form of necrological services and
funeral rites. An example of which would be
Proclamation No. 953 of President Benigno
S. Aquino III, declaring January 30, 2015 as
a National Day of Mourning in solidarity

The national flag at half-mast, according to
Republic Act No. 8491, “shall mean lowering
the flag to one-half the distance between the
top and bottom of the staff.” It is a well-
recognized symbol of national mourning.
The Flag and Heraldic Code provides for

411

fixed days when flag is at half-mast. It is done upon the day of the official announcement of
the death of the following officials:

OFFICIAL

DURATION OF FLAG
AT HALF-MAST

President or a former President

10 days

The Vice-President, Chief Justice, Senate President, and
House Speaker

7 days

Cabinet Secretaries, Associate Justices of the Supreme Court,
members of the Senate and House of Representatives, the
Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and
the Director-General of the Philippine National Police, or in
equivalent rank

5 days

Heads of Government agencies, including Government
Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCC) and
Government Financial Institutions, or equivalent in rank

3 days

The Commanding Generals of the Philippine Air Force and
the Philippine Army and the Flag Officer in Command of the
Philippine Navy, or in equivalent rank

3 days

Governors, Vice-Governors, city and municipal Mayors, city
and municipal Vice-Mayors

3 days

Members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Sangguniang
Panlungsod and Sangguniang Bayan

Day of Interment

Veterans of the previous wars, Barangay Chairmen and the
Barangay Councilmen

Day of Interment

Former National or Local Government Officials, appointed
or elected, other than those specified above within their
former respective territorial jurisdictions and by resolution
of their respective Sanggunians

Day of Interment

412

OFFICIAL

DURATION OF FLAG
AT HALF-MAST

Regional Directors, Superintendents, Supervisors, Principals,
Teachers and other school officials, on the day of interment
and by order of the proper school authorities concerned

Day of Interment

Recipients of National Orders and Decorations, on the
day of interment and by the order of the President or the
Congress

Day of Interment

Other persons to be determined by the National Historical
Commission of the Philippines, including the former Vice-
President, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the
President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representative

7 days

Departments and branches of the government
can also order the lowering of the national
flag at half-mast in their respective premises
prior to the official proclamation.

The Armed Forces of the Philippines and
the Philippine National Police demonstrated
their solidarity with the families of the fallen
PNP operatives as they lowered their flag
at half-mast on Monday, January 26, 2015.
While, the Supreme Court flew their flag at
half-mast on January 28, 2015, Thursday —
the first time in the history of the court to fly
the flag at half-mast to honor an individual
who is not a member of the judiciary.

In other countries, it is common practice
to have desk flags and other portable flags
(in balconies and windows) to attach two
black ribbons or streamers on top to signify
mourning. [2]

B. NECROLOGICAL SERVICE

Necrological service is a formal religious
ceremony conducted before a burial takes
placed 31 The fundamental elements of this
ceremony are the eulogy and prayers for
the repose of the soul of the deceased. This
ceremony usually precedes the funeral rites.

C. MILITARY HONORS AND POLICE
FUNERAL SERVICE

Military honors and a police funeral service
are given in honor of deceased soldiers and
police officers, respectively. Both honors
involve the following:

1. A FLAG-DRAPED CASKET - The

Philippine flag may be used to cover
the caskets of the honored dead of the
military, veterans of previous wars,

413

THE HALF-MAST RULE

The flag must be raised to the top of
the pole before it is lowered to the
half-mast position; and before it is
lowered for the day it must be raised
to the top again.

*The national flag is flown at
half-mast on national days of
mourning, or during the anniversaries
of heroes, national calamities, or
international solemnity, as ordered by
the president.

a.m. p.m.

The national flag may be used to cover
the caskets of the honored dead, as
recognized by the state.

When positioning the flag, the white
triangle must be at the head of the
casket, while the blue field must cover
the right side. To prevent the flag from
falling off, a black band may be
wrapped along the side of the casket.

Before lowering the casket, the flag must
be folded and handed to the heirs of the
deceased. The national flag must not be
lowered into the grave or be allowed to
touch the ground.

Photos courtesy of the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office.

414

national artists, and civilians who have
rendered distinguished service to the
nation, as maybe determined by the
local government unit concerned. The
national flag shall be placed such that
the white triangle shall be at the head
and the blue portion shall cover the right
side of the casket. The flag shall not be
lowered to the grave or allowed to touch
the ground, but shall be folded solemnly
and handed over to the heirs of the
deceased.

2. vigil guard DETAIL - two members
of the uniformed service stand guard by
the casket

3. FIRING DETAIL:

• CANNON - a 19-gun salute, rendered to
officials of Secretary rank

• MUSKETRY - a three-volley salute

4. TAPS - a musical piece sounded during
funerals involving the trumpet and
bugle. One example would be Nearer,
My God, to Thee (1841) performed
during the funeral arrival honors of the
42 fallen PNP-SAF at the Villamor Air
Base on January 29, 2015.

ENDNOTES

[1] Valerie Cumming, C. W. Cunnington,

and P. E. Cunnington, The Dictionary
of Fashion History, s.v. “mourning
band.”

[2] Cherlynn Conetsco and Anna Hart,

Service Etiquette (Annapolis, MD:
Naval Institute Press, 2009).

[3] Louise M. Meeks, “Global Issues of

Pastoral Counseling: With Particular
Attention to the Issues of Pastoral
Counseling in the Philippines,” in
International Perspectives in Pastoral
Counseling, ed. James Reaves Farris
(Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press,
2002), 71.

415

History of the Department

FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION AND JOSELITO ARCINAS

The Department of National Defense (DND)
is tasked with guarding the Republic of the
Philippines “against external and internal
threats to national peace and security, and
to provide support for social and economic
development.” 111

EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT

In the series of missions to the United States,
the Philippine Legislature campaigned
for independence. It culminated in the
United States Congress’ enactment of the
Tydings-McDuffie Act on March 24, 1934.
It provided for a 10-year preparation
period for Philippine independence,
slated for 1946. At this time, the common
sentiment among the National Assembly
was that the lack of defense capability
was no impediment towards immediate

independence. 121 However, in the fall of
1934, Senate President Manuel L. Quezon
began to seek professional opinion about the
country’s defenses by seeking counsel from
then General Douglas MacArthur, who was
slated to step down as Chief of Staff of the
United States Army in 1935. MacArthur
was receptive to the idea of appointment
as military adviser to the Commonwealth.
Quezon met with the United States Secretary
of War George Dern to discuss defense
issues and make arrangements for American
assistance through MacArthur. 131

In preparation for the 10-year transitional
Commonwealth Government, the
Constitutional Convention convened in
1934, tasked with drafting a constitution for
the Philippines. It was composed of members
elected by the Filipino people. Two of the
innovations they incorporated into the draft
were a second declaration of principle, which

416

stated that all citizens may be required by law
to render personal military or civil service,
and a third principle which stated that “the
Philippines renounces war as an instrument
of national policy and adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as
part of the law of the Nation.”

The second principle was based on the
recommendation of the convention’s
Committee on National Defense led by
delegate Jose Alejandrino, which was
modeled after the constitution of the Spanish
Republic and other European constitutions
that required citizens to become reserve
troops in times of ward 41

The third principle was inspired by the
Kellogg-Briand Pact, signed by numerous
countries around the world in 1928
(including Japan and the United States). The
pact outlawed war and aggression as an
assertion of sovereignty, 151 which prior to the
pact was a generally accepted foreign policy.
Having it incorporated in the Philippine
Constitution of 1935 set a legal base, not for
a War Department, but for a Department of
National Defense. This drew much criticism
at the time due to the distinct difference
between the department and its counterpart
in the United States, which only abolished its
War Department in 1947, and which created
its Department of Defense in 1949. [61

With the inauguration of the Commonwealth
on November 15, 1935, the newly elected
President Manuel L. Quezon issued
Executive Order No. 2, s.1935, assuming
command of military forces, thereby sending
the signal that a Filipino Chief Executive
had assumed the role of Commander-in-

PHOTO: (Clockwise) Jose Abad Santos, Chief
Justice Avancena, Jorge Vargas, Benigno Aquino
Sr., Quintin Paredes, Manuel Roxas, Sotero Baluyot,
Rafael Alunan Sr., Teofilo Sison. Photo from the
Quezon Family Collection.

Chief, the power once held by Spanish and
American governor-generals. [71 The next
day, President Quezon appointed Douglas
MacArthur as military adviser to the
Commonwealth, and established the Council
of National Defense (Executive Order No.
3, s. 1935). The importance of national
defense was emphasized by Quezon calling
the National Assembly to a Special Session.
In his first State of the Nation Address,
President Quezon pointed out that the special
session was called for the sole purpose of
deliberating upon, and passing, a national
defense legislation, authorizing a national
mobilization in the face of impending threat
or aggression. Hence, on December 21, 1935,
the National Assembly enacted the first of
the Commonwealth Acts, Commonwealth
Act No. 1, known as the National Defense

417

Act. It established the Council of National
Defense, with the President as the chairman.
It also put emphasis on the supremacy of civil
authority over military force — to strengthen
constitutional principles of democracy to
keep the armed forces subordinate to civilian
authority. The Act viewed the formation of
a citizen-army composed of reservists, with
the core of Philippine land defense that it
established resting on a small professional
army of some 350 officers and 5,000 enlisted
men, with a permanent army headquarters
and staff. 181 Henceforth, the day of the
enactment of the law became known as the
foundation day of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines or AFP Day.

Through Executive Order No. 11, dated
January 11, 1936, President Quezon

appointed Brigadier General Jose delos Reyes
as acting Chief of Staff of the Philippine
Army. In that same order, the Philippine
Constabulary, consisting of some 6,000
officers and enlisted men at the time, was
integrated into the Army of the Philippines as
regulars. In effect, the Constabulary became
the country’s army nucleus. 191

With all these defense plans coming together,
on August 24, 1936, General Douglas
MacArthur was appointed by President
Quezon as the Field Marshal of the
Philippine Army, the highest military rank
in the Commonwealth. MacArthur was the
only one in history to hold the position. 1101

Field Marshal MacArthur, as army
commander, believed that at the end of the
Commonwealth period, the Philippines
would have at least 400,000 reserve citizen-
soldiers. By 1938, however, only 69,848

had been given intensive military training,
in contrast to the projected 120,000 for a
three-year period at the rate of 40,000 a year.
Furthermore, the United States Congress
also rejected any plan to fortify Guam or the
Philippines, making the National Assembly
exclaim that the Philippines was on its
own and should see to its own defenses. 1111
The need for a unifying authority of these
defense efforts set the precedent for the
establishment of a defense department under
the Commonwealth president.

In early 1939, President Quezon had serious
doubts about the MacArthur defense plan.
1121 This was reinforced when General
Vicente Lim submitted his resignation as
Assistant Chief of Staff, War Plans Division,
of the Philippine Army — a resignation
President Quezon rejected. 1131 Lim and other
professional soldiers reported to President
Quezon the grim situation faced by the
army — a general lack of morality: forgery,
embezzlement, lying, and other cases of
misconduct. Both Vicente Lim and Fidel
Segundo — the first and second Filipino
graduates of the United States Military
Academy at West Point — also expressed
doubts about the MacArthur plan because
it emphasized producing, in a short time,
a large number of reserve of enlisted men
without the corresponding officers. Lim and
others assured the president that the problem
could still be fixed. By May 3 of the same year,
Vicente Lim was appointed as the Deputy
Chief of Staff. Discussions with General
Segundo and Major Dwight Eisenhower
also alarmed President Quezon, who was
informed that MacArthur issued orders
directly to Filipino officers, which Quezon
believed violated the chain of command;

418

furthermore, MacArthur’s assertion that
establishing military camps throughout the
country was important for the fostering of a
sense of nationhood was, President Quezon
believed, an intrusion into civilian political
policy and exceeded MacArthur’s authority.
President Quezon cut the number of trainees
in half, with savings from this put into
training better officers, as well as to save for
equipment. The fund for weapons could be
accumulated until 1946 so the country could
buy more modern weapons. [14! By this time,
President Quezon was seriously considering
the formation of a defense department to
expedite defense preparations.

PHOTO: Vice President Osmena (at foot of
table with back to camera) Secretary of Public
Instruction; Executive Secretary Jorge Vargas,
Labor Secretary Jose Avelino, Finance Secretary
Serafin Marabut, Justice Secretary Jose Abad
Santos, Interior Secretary Rafael Alunan, Resident
Commissioner Joaquin Elizalde, President Quezon,
Commissioner of the Budget Sotero Baluyot
(partially hidden), Agriculture Secretary Benigno
Aquino, Auditor-General Jaime Hernandez,
Defense Secretary Teofilo Sison. Photo from the
Quezon Family Collection.

On June 23, 1938, President Quezon
persuaded the National Assembly to pass
Commonwealth Act No. 343, which abolished
the state police force and reorganized the
Constabulary, separating it from the Philippine
Army, under Mac Arthur! 151 This resulted in

significant changes in the command, with the
Constabulary no longer being the nucleus of
the army.

The Department of National Defense was
finally created on November 1, 1939, by
virtue of Executive Order No. 230, issued
by President Quezon. Originally having
considered the exiled revolutionary general,
Artemio Ricarte as the First Secretary of
National Defense, Quezon finally appointed
Teofilo Sison, a distinguished lawyer, from
Pangasinan as the first Secretary of National
Defense. He took his oath of office on
November 1, 1939. [16] From then on, the new
department wielded Executive Authority
over the army and, therefore, over National
Defense. Field Marshal MacArthur could
no longer order munitions, enroll trainees,
nor enter into contracts for the construction
of military facilities without the approval
of President Quezon and Teofilo Sison, the
new Secretary of National Defense! 171 Before
this date, MacArthur had a free hand in the
formulation of policies for the Philippine
defense system, and would sometimes
overstep his military boundaries. The
department oversaw the defense preparations
with little assistance from the United States.

JAPANESE OCCUPATION

Teofilo Sison relinquished the defense
portfolio in 1941, to assume the justice
portfolio vacated by Jose Abad Santos.
Therefore, at the the outbreak of the war, the
defense portfolio was vacant. On December
8, 1941, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor
in a surprise attack, effectively crippling the
American forces in the Pacific. World War
II in the Pacific Theater had begun, and the

419

Philippines was drawn into a war not of its
own making. Nevertheless, Filipinos fought
side by side with the Americans, at the cost
of great casualties.

OnDecember 16, 1 94 l,theNational Assembly
conferred emergency powers on President
Quezon, by virtue of Commonwealth Act
No. 671, which authorized the president to
reorganize the government as necessary, and
conferred legislative powers for the duration
of the national emergency. As the Imperial
Japanese Forces invaded the Philippines,
the Government was reorganized under
Executive Order No. 396 s. 1941, which
abolished the Departments of the Interior and
Justice and merged other departments. The
result was the formation of the Department
of Defense, Public Works, Communications
and Labor, which was held by General
Basilio J. Valdes for the duration of the war.

By the time Corregidor fell to the Japanese
on May 6, 1942, the Commonwealth
had established a government-in-exile in
the United States. The Japanese for their
part established a Philippine Executive
Commission to assume administrative
authority in the occupied areas. With the
institution of a Japanese-sponsored Second
Republic on October 14, 1 943, Commissioner
of Justice Jose P. Laurel was elected by the
KALIBAPI Assembly as the president. The
Second Republic did not have its own defense
department, but the Constabulary fulfilled its
duties as the state’s national police, headed
by Guillermo Francisco. The Japanese had
complete control of defense. 1181

On September 14, 1944, Field Marshal
Douglas MacArthur received a directive

PHOTO: Teofilo Sison, the first Secretary of National
Defense. Photo from the Quezon Family Collection.

from the United States Joint Chiefs of
Staff instructing him to proceed with the
reconquest of Luzon. It was on October 20,
1944, that MacArthur and President Sergio
Osmena (who took over after President
Quezon’s death in the United States),
landed in Leyte with the Allied forces,
thereby reestablishing the Commonwealth
government on Philippine soil.

President Osmena succeeded to the presidency
on August 1, 1944. On August 8, 1944 he
issued Executive Order No. 15-W which
reorganized the government. On February
27, 1945, MacArthur formally turned over
the powers and functions of the government
to President Sergio Osmena. Osmena
issued Executive Order No. 27, s. 1945,
reorganizing and expanding the cabinet, and
thereby reestablishing the Department of
National Defense, with Tomas Cabili as the
new Secretary of Defense. 1191 The department
oversaw the promotion of peace and security
throughout the liberated areas of the country.

420

It also performed the additional task of
supervising police activities and assisting in
the reorganization of all civil police forces.
P°] Thus, the department did its duty in
defending the people and instilling law and
order in the country immediately after the
ward 211

THE THIRD REPUBLIC

The United States finally recognized
Philippine Independence on July 4, 1946,
with the inauguration of the Third Republic
and its first president, Manuel Roxas.
However, there was much to be done to
restore order. The proliferation of loose
firearms in the hands of guerrillas and
civilians alike immediately after the war had
posed a new problem to the government. In
Central Luzon, a strong wartime guerrilla
force, known as the Hukbalahap (Huk),
had held onto its power, and opposed the
government. The Huk organization traced
its beginnings to the peasant-landlord
feuds of the pre-war era, and its leadership
was heavily laced with Socialists and
Communists. From 1946 to 1950, 1221 the
Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (the new
name of the Huk organization), 1231 had
increased to 10,000-15,000 regulars with
over 100,000 supporters in a region of two
million inhabitants.

In order to reinforce the defenses of the
country against threats from within and
without, the Department of National Defense
was charged with the duty of supervising the
overall defense program of the country, with
its reaffirmed control over the Armed Forces
of the Philippines by virtue of Executive
Order No. 94, issued on October 4, 1947. [24]

PHOTO: Ramon Magsaysay, then the Defense
Secretary for President Elpidio Quirino, marking
a Huk target with a smoke bomb from a spotter

plane. Photo courtesy of LIFE Magazine.

PHOTO: Defense Secretary Ramon Magsaysay in
the field, supervising anti-Huk operations. Photo
courtesy of LIFE Magazine.

LIFE

On August 31, 1950, President Elpidio
Quirino appointed a new Secretary of
Defense, Ramon Magsaysay, to tackle the
Huk problem. 1251 Magsaysay developed

421

a plan to both attack and attract the
Huks. He lobbied Congress to increase its
appropriation of budget for the Defense
Department, from PHP 57 million to PHP
147,192,246, which was approved for the
fiscal year 1952-1953. Magsaysay then
trained and equipped nine battalion combat
teams to arrange for a coordinated attack
on the Huks. At the same time, Magsaysay
initiated the Economic Development Corp
(EDCOR), which consisted of army engineers
who built settlements in 6,500 hectares in
Kapatagan, Lanao, and 23,000 hectares in
Buldon, Cotabato, where former insurgents

were given land to settle on, complete with
farm implements and seeds. These former
insurgents were also assisted by the Los
Banos Agricultural School, to ensure their
success in cultivating their land! 261 These
unconventional methods won the Huk
insurgents over, which lead to their weakening
and to the eventual surrender of Huk leader
Luis Taruc in 1954. Magsaysay’s efforts were
applauded and copied in other parts of the
world. The department’s achievement under
Magsaysay was said to be Asia’s first victory
against internal communism.

MARTIAL LAW PERIOD

The department would expand its power
when President Ferdinand E. Marcos
assumed the presidency in 1965. In his first

term, Marcos retained his defense portfolio
for the first 13 months. He then undertook the
largest reshuffle of the military in Philippine
history, with a number of key appointments
granted to officers from his home province

422

of Ilocos Norte. 1271 He appointed Juan Ponce
Enrile as his Secretary of Defense on February
9, 1970, a position Enrile held until August
27, 1971, and again on January 4, 1972 (this
time as Minister of Defense), until Enrile’s
defection from the Marcos administration.

Under Martial Law, with the promulgation
of the 1973 Constitution, the DND was
reorganized as the Ministry of Defense.
During this time, Defense was the most
powerful ministry in the Executive Branch.
President Marcos as dictator was vested with
powers to “govern the nation and direct the
operation of the entire government including
all its agencies and instrumentalities.” 1281
Defense Minister Enrile focused his efforts
on a broad review of defense policies and
on dealing with pressing social unrest in
Central Luzon and Mindanao. 12911301 The
abolition of civilian institutions such as
Congress, the weakening of the judiciary,
and the outlawing of political parties, left
the military as the only other instrumentality
of the national government outside of the
Presidency. Thus, it was also during this time
that the ministry was plagued by a culture
of excess and a propensity to commit human
rights violations.

The assassination of Senator Benigno S.
Aquino Jr. on August 21, 1983, set the
precedent for a peaceful revolution, EDSA, on
February 1986. One of the EDSA Revolution’s
pivotal moments was when Defense Minister
Enrile, together with AFP Vice Chief of
Staff, Lt. Gen. Fidel V. Ramos, defected on
February 22, 1986. 1311 They withdrew their
support from President Marcos, and asked
him to step down from office. The success of
EDSA made the peaceful transition of power

possible. President Corazon C. Aquino was
elected president, and a major clean-up of the
Ministry of Defense and the military began.

THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT FROM 1987
TO PRESENT

On July 25, 1987, President Corazon
C. Aquino, the newly elected, issued the
Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive
Order No. 292, s. 1987), giving executive
supervision of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines, the Office of Civil Defense, the
Philippine Veterans Office, the National
Defense College of the Philippines, and the
Government Arsenal, to the reinstituted
Department of National Defense.

Today, the Department continues to fulfill
its mandate to serve and protect the Filipino
people, to protect the State and to ensure
security and peace where the sovereignty of
the Philippines is present.

Voltaire Gazmin, Secretary of National Defense
from 2010 onward.

423

SECRETARIES OF NATIONAL DEFENSE

NAME

TERM

ADMINISTRATION

TITLE HELD

Teofilo Sison

November 1, 1939
-July 15, 1941

Commonwealth
of the Philippines,
Quezon

Secretary of National
Defense

Jorge B.
Vargas

December 11, 1941
- December 22,
1941

Commonwealth
of the Philippines,
Quezon

Secretary to the President
(Executive Secretary)
and concurrently Acting
Secretary of National
Defense

Basilio J.
Valdes

December 24, 1941
- February 26,

1945

Commonwealth
of the Philippines,
Quezon

Secretary of National
Defense, Public Works,
Communications and Tabor

Tomas L.
Cabili

February 27, 1945
-July 11, 1945

Commonwealth
of the Philippines,
Osmena

Secretary of National
Defense, Public Works,
Communications and Tabor

Alfredo M.

Montelibano

Sr.

July 12, 1945 -
May 27, 1946

Commonwealth
of the Philippines,
Osmena

Secretary of National
Defense

Ruperto K.
Kangleon

May 28, 1946 -
August 31, 1950

Third Republic,
Roxas - Quirino

Secretary of National
Defense

Ramon

Magsaysay

September 1, 1950
- February 28,
1953

Third Republic,
Quirino

Secretary of National
Defense

Oscar T.
Castelo

March 1, 1953 -
December 30, 1953

Third Republic,
Quirino

Acting Secretary of National
Defense

Ramon

Magsaysay

January 1, 1954 -
May 14, 1954

Third Republic,
Magsaysay

President of the Philippines,
retained the Defense
portfolio in concurrent
capacity until 1954

Sotero B.
Cabahug

May 14, 1954 -
January 2, 1956

Third Republic,
Magsaysay

Secretary of National
Defense

Eulogio B.
Balao

January 3, 1956 -
August 28, 1957

Third Republic,
Magsaysay -
Garcia

Secretary of National
Defense

Jesus M.
Vargas

August 28, 1957 -
May 18, 1959

Third Republic,
Garcia

Secretary of National
Defense

424

NAME

TERM

ADMINISTRATION

TITLE HELD

Ale jo S.
Santos

June 11, 1959-
December 30, 1961

Third Republic,
Garcia

Secretary of National
Defense

Macario P.
Peralta, Jr.

January 1, 1962 -
December 30, 1965

Third Republic,
Macapagal

Secretary of National
Defense

Ferdinand E.
Marcos

December 31, 1965
-January 20, 1967

Third Republic,
Marcos

President of the Philippines,
retained the Defense
portfolio in concurrent
capacity until 1967

Ernesto S.
Mata

January 21, 1967 -
February 3, 1970

Third Republic,
Marcos

Secretary of National
Defense

Juan Ponce
Enrile

February 9, 1970
- August 27, 1971
(September 10,
1971)

Third Republic,
Marcos

Secretary of National
Defense

Ferdinand E.
Marcos

August 28, 1971 -
January 3, 1972

Third Republic,
Marcos

President of the Philippines,
retained the Defense
portfolio in concurrent
capacity until until 1972

Juan Ponce
Enrile

January 4, 1972 -
November 23, 1986

Third Republic,
Marcos

Secretary of National
Defense; Minister of
Defense (January 17, 1973
Constitution)

Rafael Ileto

November 23, 1986
-January 21, 1988

Fourth Republic,
Corazon C. Aquino;
Fifth Republic,
Corazon C. Aquino
(1987)

Minister of Defense until
February 11, 1987 when
title returned to Secretary
of National Defense (under
1987 Constitution)

Fidel V.
Ramos

January 22, 1988 -
July 18, 1991

Fifth Republic,
Corazon C. Aquino

Secretary of National
Defense

Renato S. De
Villa

July 20, 1991 -
September 15, 1997

Fifth Republic,
Corazon C. Aquino
- Ramos

Secretary of National
Defense

Fortunato U.
Abat

September 16, 1997
-June 30, 1998

Fifth Republic,
Ramos

Secretary of National
Defense

Orlando S.
Mercado

July 1, 1998 -
January 29, 2001

Fifth Republic,
Estrada -

Macapagal- Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

425

NAME

TERM

ADMINISTRATION

TITLE HELD

Eduardo

Ermita

January 26, 2001 -
March 19, 2001

Fifth Republic,
MacapagaT Arroyo

Acting Secretary of National
Defense

Angelo T.
Reyes

March 19, 2001 -
August 29, 2003

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

Gloria

Macapagal-

Arroyo

August 29, 2003 -
October 2, 2003

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

President of the Philippines,
retained the Defense
portfolio in concurrent
capacity until, until 2003

Eduardo

Ermita

October 3, 2003 -
August 24, 2004

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

Avelino J.
Cruz Jr.

August 25, 2004 -
November 30, 2006

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

Gloria

Macapagal-

Arroyo

November 30, 2006
- February 1, 2007

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

President of the Philippines,
retained the Defense
portfolio in concurrent
capacity until February 1,
2007

Hermogenes
E. Ebdane Jr.

February 1, 2007 -
July 2, 2007

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

Norberto B.
Gonzales

July 2, 2007 -
August 6, 2007

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

Acting Secretary of National
Defense

Gilberto C.
Teodoro Jr.

August 7, 2007 -
November 16, 2009

Fifth Republic,
Macapagal- Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

Norberto B.
Gonzales

November 16, 2009
-June 30, 2010

Fifth Republic,
MacapagaT Arroyo

Secretary of National
Defense

Voltaire

Gazmin

June 30, 2010 -
Present

Fifth Republic,
Benigno S. Aquino
III

Secretary of National
Defense

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Although the Department of National
Defense was established in 1939, its tradition
dates back to the Philippine Revolution of
1896.

SPANISH COLONIAL PERIOD

During the Spanish Colonial Period, the
Governor General of the Philippines was
also the Captain General, the highest military
rank in the Spanish Cortes. The Captain
General, in effect, was the Commander in
Chief of the Spanish army and navy. This

426

position would be adopted by the Tejeros
Republic in 1897, although relegated to
a separate position from the president. 1321
However, from the First Republic onwards,
the presidency held the title of Commander
in Chief, administering the powers of the
army directly to his chiefs of staff.

THE PHILIPPINE REVOLUTION

In the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution
against Spain on August 1896, the need for
a “Department of War” was recognized by
Filipino revolutionaries, and thus a more
systematic chain of command was organized
within the Kataas-taasang Kagalang-
galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan
(Katipunan), the Filipino revolutionary
organization. Andres Bonifacio, Supremo
of the Katipunan, picked Teodoro Plata, his
brother-in-law, as his Secretary of War. 1331

This carried over during the Katipunan’s
election of representatives to the Tejeros
Convention, during which the position
Director of War was created. Emilio
Aguinaldo was elected in absentia to
the presidency on March 22, 1897, thus
abolishing the Katipunan. Emiliano Riego
de Dios was also elected as the Director of
War. He was sworn in on March 23, 1897,
at Tanza, Cavite. 1341 The war against Spain
demonstrated for the first time the capability
of Filipinos to organize a formal army to
fight foreign rule.

A peaceful resolution was finally concluded
between Filipino and Spanish forces on
December 20, 1897, during the Pact of Biak-
na-Bato, which temporarily ceased hostilities
on both sides, the leaders of the revolution
having been voluntarily exiled to Hong Kong.

On May 19, 1898, Emilio Aguinaldo
returned from exile to resume the revolution.
He organized the Revolutionary Government
on June 23, 1898. 1351 The Department of War
was reinstated when Aguinaldo appointed
Baldomero Baloy Aguinaldo as Secretary of
War and Public Works, and Antonio Luna — a
known military strategist and Ilustrado,
trained in Europe — as Director of War (the
position now equivalent to Chief of Staff
of the Armed Forces). During this time, the
army was under the Department of War and
Public Works, while the navy was under the
Department of Foreign Affairs. 1361 Aguinaldo
exercised complete control of the army, as
Commander in Chief, through his Secretary
of War.

Upon the defeat of the Spanish forces in the
country, on September 15, 1898, the Malolos
Congress was convened, composed of
civilian representatives from various regions
all over the country. While the Congress
ratified the Proclamation of Independence, it
also attempted to assert civilian control over
the Philippine government, which was then
dominated by military control.

In fulfillment of this, Aguinaldo appointed
certain civilians into crucial defense command
positions. He issued an order on September
26, 1898, reorganizing the departments,
thereby integrating the Department of War
into the Department of Foreign Affairs, with
civilians in charge — Secretary of Foreign
Affairs Cayetano Arellano, and Felipe
Buencamino as Director of War. 1371 General
Antonio Luna was made Chief of War
Operations. 1381 This healthy friction between
civilian and military influence in government
would turn out to be henceforth an imprint
in Philippine governance.

427

THE FIRST REPUBLIC

When President Emilio Aguinaldo’s cabinet
was reorganized on January 1, 1899,
under Apolinario Mabini as President of
the Government Council (equivalent to
Prime Minister), Baldomero Aguinaldo
was reinstated as the Secretary of War and
Navy. 1391 On the inauguration of the First
Republic, Antonio Luna was appointed as
the Commanding General of the Philippine
Army under the Department of War and
Navy. [401 These men held their posts amidst
the growing tension between the Philippine
government and the American military
presence in Manila. Tensions escalated when
the 1898 Treaty of Paris was concluded
between Spain and the United States, without
the representatives from the First Republic.
With the outbreak of the Philippine- American
War on February 4, 1899, the Department of
War and Navy did its duty under heavy fire
from the technologically advanced Gatling
guns of the American forces.

The American capture of President Aguinaldo
on March 23, 1901, at Palanan, Isabela,
signalled the end of the First Republic and
its war department, 1411 but fierce resistance
continued, led by General Miguel Malvar,
and later by General Macario Sakay.

AMERICAN COLONIAL PERIOD

After the fall of the First Republic, the United
States abolished the American military
government and establishment a civil
government, on July 4, 1901. 1421 Two weeks
later, the Philippine Commission adopted
Act No. 175, which called for the creation
of an insular police force charged with the
maintenance of peace and order, and the

suppression of crime. 1431 Thus, the Philippine
Constabulary was established on August
8, 1901, to carry out this function. 1441 The
United States Army — including a fighting
force of Filipinos, the Philippine Scouts —
were tasked to suppress armed insurrections
beyond the control of the civil government.

The Constabulary and the United States Army
remained at the forefront of the country’s
defense throughout the American period.
Led by American officers and functioning as
a bureau, the Constabulary was under the
United States Department of Commerce and
Police. Flowever, to a certain extent, it was
controlled by the Bureau of Insular Affairs of
the War Department of the United States. 14511461

Under American military, and then civil,
government, Filipinos were, at first, generally
barred from joining the Constabulary.
Few Filipinos were taken in as inspectors,
including those who had fought in the
Philippine-American War and had shown
military aptitude. But as civil positions
were slowly being opened to Filipinos,
the Constabulary soon followed. The first
Filipinos on the Constabulary were Jose
Velasquez of Nueva Ecija and Felix Llarento
of Manila. 1471 The first Filipino to become
Chief of the Philippine Constabulary was
Brigadier General Rafael Crame, who served
with distinction from December 17, 1917, to
January 1, 1927. Americans took over again
after Crame’s term, until the appointment
of Brigadier General Basilio Valdes as the
second Filipino chief of the Constabulary at
the eve of the Commonwealth inauguration.

The Jones Law of 1916 — and with it the
pledge of eventual independence — led to the
eventual creation of an all-Filipino legislature

428

composed of the Philippine Senate and
House of Representatives. But the mandate
of defense was still held by the United States
War Department.

With the outbreak of World War I, the
Philippine Legislature, led by Senate President
Manuel L. Quezon, offered the United States
assistance by providing a whole division of
Filipino troops. They were sourced from
the Philippine National Guard, which was
instituted by the Militia Act of March 17,
1917. The gesture was meant to be both
a sign of loyalty to the United States and
as partial proof of Filipinos’ capability for
independence. The National Guard was also
viewed by Filipino leaders as a potential
nucleus for a future Philippine army under a
Department of Defense, come independence.
But the National Guard was only federalized
by the United States Congress after the war
ended. But it was too late, and it was eventually
disbanded! 481 Later on, when the Tydings
McDuffie Act was enacted, the establishment
of the Commonwealth Government was set.
The 1935 Constitution’s provision on Article
II, Section 2 and 3, became the precedent for
the establishment of the Defense Department
in 1939.

ENDNOTES

[1J “Mandate, Mission and Vision,”
Department of National Defense,
accessed November 2, 2014, http://
www.dnd.gov.ph/transparency/about-
dnd/mandate-mission-vision.html.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ricardo Trota Jose, The Philippine Army

1935-1942 (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila University Press, 1992), 22-24.

[4] Jose M. Aruego, The Framing of the

Philippine Constitution (Manila:
University Publishing Co., 1936), 135.

[5] Pam Cornelison and Ted Yanak, The

Great American History Factfinder
(Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt, 2004), 281.

[6] Aruego, The Framing of the Philippine

Constitution, 142-143.

[7] “Executive Order No. 2, s. 1935,”

Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines, November 15, 1935,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/1 935/1 1/15/execu tive-order-no-
2-S-1935/.

[8] “Commonwealth Act No. 1,” Official

Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, December 21, 1935,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://www.
gov.ph/1 935/12/21/commonwealth-act-
no-1/

[9] “Executive Order No. 11, s. 1936,”

Messages of the President, Vol. 2, Part
1 (Manila: Bureau of Printing, 1937),
615.

[10] “On the MacArthur’s in the Philippine
history, at a dinner in honor of Field
Marshal Douglas MacArthur, at
Malacanan Palace, Manila — August
24, 1936,” Messages of the President

429

Vol. 2, Part 1 (Manila: Bureau of
Printing, 1937), 119-125.

[1 1 J Jose, The Philippine Army, 127.

[12J Ibid., 115.

[13] Ibid., 120.

[14] Ibid., 121.

[15] “Commonwealth Act No. 343,”
Philippine Law, accessed March 10,
2016, http://philippinelaw.info/
statutes/ca343.html.

[16] “Teofilo Sison Profile,” Department
of National Defense, accessed March
2014, http://www.dnd.gov.ph/teofilo-l-
sison.html

[17] Jose, The Philippine Army, 130.

[18] “The Second Republic,” Presidential
Museum and Library, accessed March
10, 2016, http://malacanang.gov.
ph/5235 -70th-anniversary-of-the-
second-philippine-republic/.

[19] “Tomas Cabili Profile,” Department of
National Defense, accessed March 10,
2016, http://www.dnd.gov.ph/tomas-l-
cabili.html.

[20] “Executive Order No. 51, s. 1945,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, June 7, 1945, accessed
March 10, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1945/06/07/executive-order-no-
51-S-1945/.

[21] Douglas MacArthur: “All the
Philippines are now liberated.” As
quoted from Jon Sterngass, Filipino
Americans (New York, NY: Chelsea
House Publishers, 2007), 31.

[22] “Chapter IV: The Insurrection, Phase I,”
U.S. Army Center of Military History,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://www.
history.army.mil/books/coldwar/huk/
ch4.htm.

[23] Salvador Lopez, Elpidio Quirino: The
Judgment of History (Manila: President
Elpidio Quirino Foundation, 1990),
116.

[24] “Executive Order No. 94, s. 1947,”
Official Gazette of the Republic of the
Philippines, October 4, 1947, accessed
March 10, 2016, http://www.gov.
ph/1947/10/04/executive-order-no-
94-S-1947 /.

[25] Lopez, Elpidio Quirino, 133.

[26] Ibid., 133-134.

[27] “The Final Report of the Fact-Finding
Commission: II: Political Change and
Military Transmition in the Philippines,
1966,” Official Gazette of the Republic
of the Philippines, October 3, 1990,
accessed March 10, 2016,

http ://www.gov.ph/ 1990/10/03/
the-final-report-of-the-fact-
finding-commission-ii-political-
change-and-military-transmition-in-
the-philippines- 1 966- 1 98 9-from-the-
barracks-to-the-corridors-of-power/.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Juan Ponce Enrile, Juan Ponce Enrile:

A Memoir (Quezon City: ABS-CBN
Publishing, 2012), 285.

[30] The original 1973 constitution, Art.

VII, Sec. 8 states that “The President
shall have control of the ministries.”
The amended constitution stated that
“The Prime Minister shall have control
of all ministries.”

[31] Enrile, Juan Ponce Enrile: A Memoir,
568.

[32] Artemio Ricarte held the position
of Captain General in the Tejeros
Republic, with Emilio Aguinaldo as
President.

[33] Jim Richardson, The Light of Liberty:

430

Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897 (Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila University Press,
2013), 417.

[34J Ibid., 330.

[35] Sulpicio Guevara, ed., The Laws of
the First Philippine Republic (Manila:
National Historical Institute, 1995),

35.

[36] Jose, The Philippine Army, 10.

[37] Guevara, The Laws of the First
Philippine Republic, 45-46.

[38] Arnaldo Dumindin, “June 5, 1899:
Assassination of Gen. Luna,” The
Philippine-American War, 1899-1902,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://
philippineamericanwar. webs .com/
lunaassassination.htm.

[39] Apolinario Mabini, La Revolucion
Filipina Vol. 1 (Manila: National
Historical Commission of the
Philippines, 2011), 236-237.

[40] Dumindin, “Assassination of Gen.
Luna,” http://philippineamericanwar.
webs.com/lunaassassination.htm.

[41] Arnaldo Dumindin, “Capture of
Aguinaldo, March 23, 1901,” The
Philippine-American War, 1899-1902,
accessed March 10, 2016, http://
philippineamericanwar. webs .com/
captureofaguinaldo 1 90 1 .htm.

[42] Frank Golay, Face of Empire: United
States-Philippine Relations, 1898-
1946 (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 1997), 74.

[43] “Act No. 175,” Philippine Law,
accessed March 14, 2014, http://
philippinelaw.info/ statutes/ act 1 7 5 .html.

[44] Spencer Tucker, ed., The Encyclopedia
of the Spanish-American and
Philippine-American Wars: A Political,

Social and Military History Volume 1
(Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO LLC,
2009), 482.

[45] Jose, The Philippine Army, 17.

[46] Ibid., 16.

[47] Ibid., 17.

[48] Ibid., 20.

431

The Philippines as a
Haven for Refugees

JOSELITO ARCINAS, COLINE ESTHER CARDENO, AND FRANCIS KRISTOFFER PASION

The Philippines has a long history of opening
its doors to refugees seeking asylum, even
engaging in humanitarian efforts to resettle
them. Refugees, according to the United
Nations are:

[A]ny person who: owing to a well-founded
fear of being persecuted for reasons of race,
religion, nationality, membership of a particular
social group, or political opinion, is outside the
country of his nationality, and is unable to or,
owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself
of the protection of that country. 113

Owing to the background of the country
which struggled for its own independence,
and its strong commitment as a signatory of
the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the
Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol, the
Philippines has become a refuge to many kinds
of refugees in many instances in the past.

In particular, in 2012, the Philippines was
cited for having become a state-party to
the 1954 Convention on Stateless Persons,

the only country to do so in Southeast Asia,
and its hosting of an Emergency Transit
Mechanism (ETM) for refugees.

I. JEWISH REFUGEES IN MANILA

The Jewish people were among the known
refugees in the world to have suffered intense
racial discrimination. The anti-Semitic
movement in Europe grew unprecedented
under Nazi Germany through the leadership
of Adolf Hitler leading to the 1938 event
known as the Kristallnacht, which shocked
the world, including the Philippines. German
Jews were denied one basic human right
after another. These drew the European Jews
to seek asylum in other parts of the world.

The first influx of Jewish refugees seeking
to escape the persecution of the Nazis came
to Manila in 1934. The first opportunity to
shelter a significant number of Jewish refugees
was in 1937 when the Imperial Japanese
forces attacked Shanghai, China. As a result,
the German government offered all Germans

432

in Shanghai free passage to the Philippines.
At the request of the German Consul in
Manila, President Manuel L. Quezon with
U.S. High Commissioner Paul V. McNutt,
authorized the admission of the refugees on
the condition that they would not become a
public burden. They are to be supported by
their fellow nationals in the Philippines.

On September 8, 1937, the largest refugee
group to have landed in the Philippines
composed of ethnic German and German
Jews, arrived in Manila aboard the
Norddeutscber Lloyd steamship Gneisenau.
The Jewish Refugee Committee was formed
to assume the task of providing for the
refugees. On February 15, 1939, President
Quezon sent a message to Congress urging
them to allow additional German Jewish
professionals in the country.

On February 15, 1939, in a press statement of
President Quezon, the Philippine government
reiterated its position with regards to Jewish
refugees:

The Commonwealth Government, upon
invitation of the United States, could
not turn a deaf ear to the sufferings of
these unfortunate people. The Philippine
Commonwealth, founded as it is upon justice
and righteousness and the preservation of
essential human liberties, could not but view
with sympathy the opportunity to do its share
in meeting the situation.

In the same statement, the Philippine
government offered to open its doors
to political refugees with professional
qualifications, particularly in the sciences.
Thus, the government under President
Quezon, initially planned to resettle as

many as 10,000 Jewish refugees in farming
communities and other sparsely populated
lands in Mindanao. The plan would be of
great advantage to the Philippines, as refugees
with sufficient training could develop new
crops and help the Philippine economy. With
the help of Filipino farmers and competent
agriculturists, the Jewish refugees would be
able to support themselves. Unfortunately,
the plan never became a reality.

As Jews in Manila tried to settle themselves,
the Philippine Board of Medical Examiners
allowed several Jewish physicians to take the
medical examination on May 1939 gaining
professional license as doctors. This was
further emphasized on August 1939 as an
action by President Quezon motivated by
“broad humanitarian grounds.”

As the Jewish situation worsened in Europe,
in June 1939, another 750 Jews arrived in
Manila and an additional 933 German Jews
arrived via S.S. St. Louis after they were
denied to dock by the Cuban government. 121
In May 1940, with the limits set by the
U.S. State Department, Quezon signed
Commonwealth Act No. 613 or the Philippine
Immigration Act of 1940, [31 limiting the

433

number of refugees to 500 individuals
from each nation each year. These are in
consideration of several factors: selection
of appropriate settlement for the refugees,
training of the settlers, among others. 141

Despite this, Manila continued to be a
haven for Jewish refugees. President Quezon
continued to authorize the admission of
approximately 1,000 Nazi-persecuted
Jews. In addition, Quezon donated seven
and a half hectares of his country estate in
Marikina as a working farm for the refugees.
The Marikina Hall was dedicated on April
23, 1940 and housed approximately forty
Jewish refugees. 151 At the inauguration of the
Marikina Hall, President Quezon expressed
his sympathies to the refugees and assured
the Filipino people that there is no reason to
fear economic dominance or monopoly of the
Jews in the country. 161 President Quezon said:

“It is my hope, and indeed my expectation,
that the people of the Philippines will have in
the future every reason to be glad that when
the time of need came, their country was
willing to extend a hand of welcome.”

PHOTO: President Manuel L. Quezon and two of the
Frieder brothers celebrate the dedication of Marikina
Hall. Photo courtesy of United States Holocaust
Memorial Museum Digital Assets Collection.

On June 21, 2009, the State of Israel honored
the Philippines with the erection of the Open
Doors Monument, a geometric 7-meter
sculpture, at the Rishon LeZion Memorial Park
in Israel. The monument, made of Romblon
marble, commemorated the open door policy
of the Philippines to the Jewish refugees that
saved more than a thousand Jews. 171

II. SPANISH REPUBLICANS IN THE
PHILIPPINES

During the Spanish Civil War from 1936 to
1939, droves of Spanish Republicans fled
to the Philippines in the hope of finding
safe haven. They were fleeing the Spanish
fascist Flanges led by General Francisco
Franco. When Franco was winning the last
battles around in 1939, the civilians and the
Republican army were forced to flee towards
the French border and to North Africa. 181 The
greatest of these refugee movements was in
January and February 1939 when Barcelona
fell to Francoist forces dispersing at least
500,000 Spanish Republican refugees. 191

In the Philippines, the government declared
a policy of absolute neutrality in the conflict
in Spain. In a letter dated November 10,
1937 of President Manuel L. Quezon on the
Spanish- Fascist Propaganda and his speech
dated December 23, 1938 at the Colegio de
San Juan de Letran, he stressed the need for
neutrality in the Spanish Civil War. At the turn
of the 20th century, the Spanish community
numbered to around ten thousand people.
Among the most noteworthy refugees
during the exodus from Spanish Civil War
were Benito Pabon, a Deputy of the Spanish
Parliament, and Rafael Anton, a lawyer
who had taken part in the tribunal that
condemned the death of Jose Antonio Primo

434

de Rivera. In addition, Basque exiles were
known to settle in Cebu, among them were
Saturnino Uriarte and Estanilao Garovilla. 1101

III. CHINESE REFUGEES IN LUZON

In 1937, with the encroachment of the
Imperial Japanese forces in mainland China,
and the terrible atrocities committed by
Imperial Japanese forces to the Chinese in
the Rape of Nanjing, many droves of Chinese
refugees fled to other parts of Southeast Asia
seeking refuge. President Quezon issued
Proclamation No. 173 on August 21, 1937
enjoining government agencies in the City
of Manila, City of Baguio, the Province of
Rizal, and the Mountain Province to extend
aid to refugees especially Filipino and
American nationals in China who fled to the
country. In 1940, with the Imperial Japanese
expansion undeterred, many residents of
the then British colony of Hong Kong fled
to the Philippines for safety. The Philippines
opened its doors once again to these Chinese
refugees and gave them necessary aid by
virtue of Proclamation No. 570, on July
1, 1940. The refugee crisis would continue
until December 8, 1941 when the Imperial
Japanese invasion of the Philippines began.

IV. INDOCHINESE (VIETNAMESE,
CAMBODIANS, LAO) REFUGEES IN
BATAAN AND PALAWAN

At the end of the Vietnam War, the Philippines
once again opened its doors to thousands
of Vietnamese seeking refuge in what was
then a refugee crisis in Southeast Asia. In
April 1975, during the advance of North
Vietnamese forces to Saigon (now Ho Chi
Minh City), more than 5,000 lnl Vietnamese
refugees were evacuated in the country. In

the same year, thousands of Cambodian
refugees fleeing the Khmer Rouge killing
fields and the Vietnamese occupation came
to the Philippines. 1121

By 1976-1979 in Vietnam, discontent grew
against the new communist government.
Citizens of the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam were subjected to various policies.
Many citizens were to undertake “re-
education camps,” some urban dwellers
faced resettlement on the countryside and
private enterprises were expropriated by the
government. To add more to these challenges
faced by the citizens was the rising conflict
between Vietnam and China, leading to
the attack of Chinese forces across the
Vietnamese borders on February, 1979. All
these factors led to the fleeing of thousands
of Vietnamese by boats throughout the
neighboring Southeast Asian countries. 1131

The late 1979 to the early months of 1980 in
Cambodia was a period of worsening food
shortage and the number of fleeing Cambodians
increased drastically. Moreover, one in five to
eight of all Cambodians died from execution,
starvation, and illness. At the same time, the
Vietnamese who occupied Cambodia and the
Khmer Rouge were still fighting, dispersing
thousands of Cambodians to seek asylum in
Thailand and other “countries of first asylum”
such as the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore,
and Indonesia. 1141

To give initial help to the Indochinese
refugees staying in the country, the Philippine
government sought the assistance of the
Food and Agriculture Organization headed
by Director-General Edouard Saouma on
May 14, 1979.

435

On August 21, 1979, President Ferdinand
E. Marcos issued Executive Order No. 554,
establishing a task force on international
refugee assistance and administration.
This entity was created to build refugee
processing centers as well as to coordinate
with the United Nations High Commission
for Refugees (UNHCR) in giving support
and aid to the refugees. It also designated
Ulugan Bay and Tara Island in Palawan as
initial refugee processing centers and camps.

On January 21, 1980, the Philippine Refugee
Processing Center (PRPC) was inaugurated
in Morong, BataanJ 151 This institution
served as a holding center for the refugees
prior to their relocation and settlement in
the United States, Canada, France, Australia
and in other countries. The facility, funded
by the United Nations High Commission
for Refugees (UNHCR), also provided ESL
(English as a Second Language) classes and
primary education programs.

From April, 1975 to August, 1982, more
than 30,000 1161 Indochinese refugees were
sheltered by the Philippine government
in cooperation with the international
community. From 1 9 9 4 11 71 to 1995, due to
the significant decrease of refugees, the PRPC
started its decommissioning process by virtue
of Memorandum Order No. 267. In its short
history, the PRPC provided food, shelter and
education to about 400,000 migrants.

V. WHITE RUSSIAN REFUGEES IN SAMAR

The victory of the Bolsheviks under Vladimir
Lenin in 1922 in Russia marked the birth
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR). As a result of the persecution of the
Bolshevik Red Army, supporters of the Tsar

PHOTO: A scene from the Philippine Refugee
Processing Center (PRPC) at Morong, Bataan
in 1990. Photo courtesy of Project Ngoc,
Photographer, Wikimedia Commons.

and the Russian imperial court, called the
White Russians, evacuated to neighboring
European countries, travelling as far as
Shanghai, China. The pressure of the advance
of the Chinese communist army forced the
White Russian community into a search for
refuge.

In December 1948, President Elpidio Quirino
offered temporary shelter for 8,000 evacuees
in the former naval base of Tubabao Island in
Guiuan, Samar. 1181 In June, 1949, the Cabinet
approved a four-month extension of the stay
of the refugees allowing some to visit Manila.

On April 4, 1951, Frederick R. Thompson,
chief of the International Refugee
Organization (IRO) mission in the Far East,
paid a courtesy call on President Quirino
to thank the Chief Executive for having
offered a refuge for the displaced persons
at the refugee camp at Tubabao Island. The
President instructed acting Census Director
Alfredo Eugenio to preserve the center’s
buildings and other improvements made by
the International Refugee Organization of the
United Nations, preparatory to the property
acquisition by the Philippine Government.

436

VI. REFUGEES IN RECENT YEARS

After the EDSA People Power Revolution
in 1986, on September 19, 1986, President
Corazon C. Aquino, in a speech delivered
in New York, declared 1986 as the “Year of
Liberty,” commemorating the ideals shared
by Americans and Filipinos in welcoming
refugees. To further emphasize on this, in
lieu of the Philippine commitment in the
1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status
of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating
to the Status of Refugees (or New York
Protocol), President Aquino issued Executive
Order No. 304, s. 1987, authorizing the
Task Force on Refugee Assistance and
Administration and the Department of
Foreign Affairs to respectively issue identity
papers and travel documents to refugees
staying in the Philippines. The Task Force was
further reconstituted by virtue of Executive
Order No. 332, s. 1988.

In 1996, under the Ramos Administration,
the Indochinese refugee program in Palawan
was set to be closed. The Vietnamese
refugees were prevented to visit their
relatives in Vietnam due to issues of the
legality of their status. 1191 To avoid forced
repatriation of the refugees still remaining in
Palawan, the Catholic Bishops Conference
of the Philippines (CBCP) stepped in and
negotiated with the Philippine government
to allow for up to 2,710 Vietnamese refugees
to indefinitely remain in the Philippines.
Vietnamese communities all over the world
eventually raised up to $1.3 million to
establish a new camp no longer under the
auspices of the Philippine government or the
UNHCR. This led to the establishment of the
“Viet Ville,” a Vietnamese refugee settlement
in Palawan, supported by the Center for

Assistance to Displaced Persons (CADP) of
the CBCPd 201

In 1998, the Department of Justice (DOJ)
formed a Refugee Processing Unit, but such
unit, however, did not have the mandate to cater
to the needs of stateless individuals! 211 It was
only during the term of President Benigno S.
Aquino III when the Philippine Government
finally acceded to the 1954 UN Convention
Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.

Today, the Philippines continues to open
its doors and provide humanitarian aid to
stateless people. Reaffirming the Aquino
Administration’s commitment to the
promotion and protection of human rights,
the DOJ issued last 18 October 2012
Department Circular No. 058 or the rules
on “Establishing the Refugee and Stateless
Status Determination Procedure,” in line
with international standards.

ENDNOTES

[1J “Convention and Protocol Relating to
the Status of Refugees,” United Nations
Human Rights Council, accessed
May 21, 2015, http://www.unhcr.
org/3b66c2aal0.html.

[2] Jonathan Goldstein and Dean

Kotlowski, Between Mumbai and
Manila: Judaism in Asia Since The
Founding of the State of Israel
(Proceedings of the International
Conference) (Gottingen: V&R
Unipress, 2013), 133.

[3] “Commonwealth Act No. 613,”

Philippine Commission on Women,
accessed May 21, 2015, http://
www.pcw.gov.ph/sites/default/files/
documents/laws/commonwealth_

437

act_613.pdf

[4] Goldstein and Kotlowski, Between

Mumbai and Manila, 133.

[5] Ibid.

[6] “Quezon Expresa Simpatias Por Judios

Opresos,” La Vanguardia, April 24, 1940.

[7] Monument in Israel to honors Filipinos,”

Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 28,
2009, accessed May 21, 2015, http://
newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/
nation/view/ 20090628-212784/
Monument-in-Israel-honors-Filipinos

[8] “Remembering Spain’s pain in Exile,”

The United Nations Refugee Agency,
accessed May 21, 2015, http://www.
unhcr.org/3da432f94.html.

[9] Sharif Gemie, Outcast Europe: Refugees

and Relief Workers in an Era of Total
1936-1948 (Edinburgh: A&C Black,
2012 ).

[10] de Borja, Marciano, Basques in the
Philippines (Reno, NV: University of
Nevada Press, 2005).

[11] “Vietnam Evacuation,” Air Force
Historical Studies, accessed May 21,
2015, http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/
media/d ocument/AFD - 1 2 0 8 2 3 - 0 3 3 . pdf

[12] Philippine Diplomatic Handbook
(Washington: International Business
Publications, 2007), 111.

[13] “Flight from Indochina,” United
Nations High Commission for
Refugees, accessed May 21, 2015,
http://www.unhcr.org/3ebf9bad0.pdf

[14] Donald E. Weatherbee, “Human
Security in Southeast Asian
International Relations,” International
Relations in Southeast Asia: The
Struggle for Autonomy (Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield, 2008), 237.

[15] “The Boat People Museum,” Morong

Museum, accessed May 21, 2016,

https://morongmuseum.wordpress.com/

history/.

[16] Larry Clinton Thompson, Refugee
Workers in the Indochina Exodus,
1975-1982, accessed May 21,

2015, https://books.google.com.ph/
books ?id=zI5S5eS4LQC&:pg=PA
63&dq=marcos+and+the+vietnamese+
refugees8dil=en&;sa=X&ei=r01cVeaL
BIvx8g Xyl4HwAw&ved=0CCEQ6A
EwAQ#v=snippet&q=1979&:f= false.

[17] “The Boat People Museum,” https://
morongmuseum.wordpress.com/history/

[18] “Exploring Transnational Communities
in the Philippines,” United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization, accessed May 21, 2015,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/
001530/153053e.pdf

[19] Ibid.

[20] James Pangilinan, “Screening Subjects:
Humanitarian Government and

the Politics of Asylum at Palawan”
(Master’s thesis, University of
Washington, 2014), 131.

[21] “DOJ Formalizes Rules and
Mechanisms for the Protection of
Refugees and Stateless Person,
Department of Justice, October 22,
2012, accessed May 21, 2015, http://
www.doj.gov.ph/news. html?title=

DOJ+ FORMALIZES+RULES+AND

+MECH ANISMS+F O R+THE+

PROTECTION+OF+REFUGEES+

AND+STATELESS+PERSONS&news

id=138#thash.4PlzVukC.0VeSRpqB.

dpuf

438

nnn

lee

State Visit, Official Visit
and Working Visit

MARK BLANCO AND DAVID MANAOIS

The Department of Foreign Affairs
recommends what level of visit a Head
of State pays to the country. It could be
classified as a state visit, official visit, or
working visit.

WHAT IS A STATE VISIT?

A foreign head of state visits, having been
invited by the host head of state.

Arrival ceremonies include the playing of
the national anthems of the two nations, a
review of the honor guards, and rendering
of full military honors, including a 21 -gun
salute for the head of state. The leaders
then proceed to enter the State Entrance
of Malacanan Palace, climb the grand
staircase, and the visiting leader signs the
Official Guest Book in the Ceremonial Hall,
followed by a bilateral meeting and a joint
press conference.

A state luncheon or dinner is held in honor
of the visiting head of state. These usually
consist of a reception in the Reception Hall
of Malacanan Palace where the two leaders
greet guests in a reception line. The state
dinner is held either in the Aguinaldo State
Dining Room or the Rizal Ceremonial Hall,
which includes exchange of toasts. There
can also be a cultural presentation at the
end of the dinner or luncheon. The host
country shoulders the costs for the visit for
the official delegation only. This may include
accommodations and providing vehicles
for travel unless the delegation chooses to
provide its own.

In this type of visit, the visiting official
can have 8-10 (not counting the official)
personnel as part of his official delegation.

State Visits reflect the highest level of
hospitality, honor, and formality in relations

439

between nations. They often include
extending the use of a State Guest House
to the visiting head of state, the conferment
of decorations, the exchange of symbolic
gifts, and can also include an address by the
visiting head of state to the legislature of
the host country as well as visits to various
national memorials and the inclusion of
cultural activities.

In the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations, there is a tradition that the first
state visit of a new regional leader should be
made to a fellow ASEAN member nation. In
the Philippines, a state visit by a visiting head
of state invariably includes laying a wreath
at the tomb and monument of Jose Rizal
upon arrival in the national capital, and
the rendering of arrival and other honors at
Malacanan Palace.

WHAT IS AN OFFICIAL VISIT?

This is when high-ranking officials (cabinet
level to head of government) are invited to
visit another country by its government.
Honors are given if the foreign official is the
head of government, but not so for cabinet-
rank officials. No luncheon or dinner is
required. The host country pays for the
visit’s cost for the official delegation unless
the delegation opts to provide for its own
needs.

In this type of visit, the visiting official may
have up to six (not counting the official)
personnel as part of his official delegation.

WHAT IS A WORKING VISIT?

No invitation is necessary for a working
visit. An official meets with his counterpart
to discuss issues concerning both countries.
The host country does not pay for the
accommodations or other expenses of the
official delegation during working visits.

440

STATE VISITS

The difference between state, official, and working visits

TYPE OF VISIT

ATTENDEES

INVITATION

STATE LUNCHEON
/DINNER

MILITARY

HONORS

WHO SHOULDERS
THE COST?

STATE

Head of state
plus 8-10
personnel

From the host
government

A state
luncheon or
dinner is held.

Military honors are
given and both
countries play their
national anthems.

The host country pays
for the visit's cost for the
official delegation.

This can include
accommodations and
vehicles unless
delegation provides its
own.

OFFICIAL

Any

high-ranking
government
official plus 6
personnel

From the host
government

It is not
required to
have a
luncheon or
dinner.

Honors are given if
the foreign official is
the head of
government but not
for cabinet rank.

The host country pays
for the visit's cost for the
official delegation.

This can include
accommodations and
vehicles unless
delegation provides its
own.

WORKING

Any

high-ranking

government

official

No invitation is
necessary

No state

luncheon/

dinner

No military
honors

The host
country does
not pay for
working visits.

ACCORDING TO THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENTIAL PROTOCOL AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS PROTOCOL OFFICE

PCDSPO | GOV. PH

441

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office and the
Presidential Museum and Library would like to thank the following:

INSTITUTIONS: National Historical Commission of the Philippines, National Museum of
the Philippines, National Commission for Culture and the Arts, National Library of the
Philippines, Intramuros Administration, National Parks Development Committee, Metro
Manila Development Authority, My Rizal 150, United Architects of the Philippines,
Department of National Defense, Armed Forces of the Philippines Museum, Cultural Center
of the Philippines, Museo ni Manuel L. Quezon, Memorare Manila 1945 Foundation,
Tiger Films Productions, Filipinas Heritage Library, Lopez Museum and Library, Ortigas
Foundation Library, Heritage Conservation Society, Battle of Manila Online, Ateneo de
Manila University Press, Indiana University Lilly Library, University of Texas Library,
Lopez Museum and Library, LIPAD Photography, SkyscraperCity.com, Technical Working
Committee for Kalayaan 2015, Retrato: Filipinas Photo Collection, Pupuplatter Tumblr,
Technical Working Committee for Mabini@150, The Lopez Family History Foundation, ITS
Seattle Pacific Flickr, StudioBob Flickr, British Pathe, President Manuel A. Roxas Foundation,
Gerry Roxas Foundation, Philippine Republic Stamps Blog, Veritas Publications and
Communications Foundation, Webistan Photo Agency, TIME Magazine, Manila Bulletin,
Philippine Daily Inquirer, First Quarter Storm Library, ATOM (August 21 Movement),
People’s Television Network, Inc., EDSA People Power Commission, Bancroft Library, James
B. Reuter, S.J. Foundation, Veritas Publications and Communications Foundation, Webistan
Photo Agency, Manila Bulletin, Philippine Daily Inquirer, First Quarter Storm Library, ATOM
(August 21 Movement), People’s Television Network, Inc., EDSA People Power Commission,
Commission on Human Rights, National Economic Development Authority, Bantayog ng
mga Bayani Memorial Foundation, the Presidential Commission on Good Government, the
local governments of Cavite, Caloocan, and Quezon City.

INDIVIDUALS: Ian James R. Andres, Paulo Alcazaren, Juan Carlos Ayeng, Manuel Angelo
Carreon II, Jose Custodio, Sylvia Lichauco de Leon, Wilkie B. Delumen, Jun Dagmang,
Arnaldo Dumindin, Karina Constantino-David, Ted Estacio, Robert S. Gardner, Lou Gopal,
David Guerrero, Robert Hudson, Ricardo T. Jose, Ph.D., Mr. Daniel Enrique Ladioray, Benito
J. Legarda Jr., Cora Lopez, Ino Manalo, Lorelei Stewart Mayer, Ambeth Ocampo, Olga Rizal-
Palacay of the Mabini Shrine in Tanauan, Clinton Palanca, Jim Richardson, Juan Jose Rocha,
Raul M. Sunico, John Tewell, Jose Victor Torres, Augusto F. Villalon, Francis Yumul, and
Ramon Ma. Zaragoza

442

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Heroism, Heritage And Nationhood"

See other formats